Wintel: Le Divorce Part II

 

At CES 2011, Ballmer told the world Windows would “fork”, that it would also run on lower power ARM chips for mobile devices. This was seen as a momentous breach in the long-standing Wintel duopoly. Two years later, the ARM tooth of the fork looks short and dull.

This is what I wrote almost two years ago:

After years of monogamy with the x86 architecture, Windows will soon run on ARM processors.

As in any divorce, Microsoft and Intel point fingers at one another. Intel complains about Microsoft’s failure to make a real tablet OS. They say MS has tried to shoehorn “Windows Everywhere” onto a device that has an incompatible user interface, power management, and connectivity requirements while the competition has created device-focused software platforms.

Microsoft rebuts: It’s Intel’s fault. Windows CE works perfectly well on ARM-based devices, as do Windows Mobile and now Windows Phone 7. Intel keeps telling us they’re “on track”, that they’ll eventually shrink x86 processors to the point where the power dissipation will be compatible with smartphones and tablets. But…when?

Today, a version of Windows (RT) does indeed run on an ARM processor, on Microsoft’s Surface tablet-PC hybrid. Has Microsoft finally served Intel with divorce papers?

Not so fast. The market’s reaction to Redmond’s ambitious Surface design has fallen far short of the heights envisioned in the company’s enthusiastic launch: Surface machines aren’t flying off Microsoft Store shelves. Ballmer himself admits sales are “modest” (and then quickly backpedals); Digitimes, admittedly not always reliable, quotes suppliers who say that Surface orders have been cut by half; anecdotally, but amusingly, field research by Piper Jaffray’s Gene Munster (who can be a bit excitable) shows zero Surfaces sold during a two hour period at the Mall of America on Black Friday, while iPads were selling at a rate of 11-an-hour.

Traditional PC OEMs aren’t enthusiastic either. Todd Bradley, head of HP’s Personal Systems Group, is unimpressed:

“It tends to be slow and a little kludgey as you use it .…”

Acer exec Linxian Lang warns:

“Redmond will have to eat ‘hard rice’ with Surface…it should stick to its more readily-chewed software diet.”

To be sure, there are happy Surface users, such as Steve Sinofsky, the former Windows Division President, as captured in lukew’s Instagram picture:

(An aside: I went back to Sinofsky’s 8,000 words blog post that lovingly describes the process of developing “WOA” — Windows on ARM. At the time, WOA was presented as part of the Windows 8 universe. Later, Microsoft swapped the “8″ designation and chose to use “RT” instead. These naming decisions aren’t made lightly. Is there any wonder why WOA was moved out of the Windows 8 camp?)

It’s possible that the jury is still out… Surface sales could take off, Windows RT could be embraced by leading PC OEMs… but what are the odds? In addition to the tepid reception from customers and vendors alike, Microsoft must surmount the relentless market conquest of Android and iOS tablets whose numbers (210 million units) are expected to exceed laptop sales next year.

So, no… the Wintel Divorce isn’t happening. Intel’s x86 chips will remain the processors of choice to run Windows. Next month, we’ll have CES and its usual burst of announcements, both believable and dubious (remember when 2010 was declared the Year Of The Tablet PC?). We’ll have to sort the announcements that are merely that from those that will yield an actual device, but in the end I doubt we’ll see many new and really momentous Windows RT products out there.

Microsoft’s lackluster attempt at Post-PC infidelity doesn’t help Intel in its efforts to gain a foothold in the mobile world. Intel’s perennial efforts to break into the mobile market with lower power, lower cost x86 chips have, also perennially, failed. As a result, there is renewed speculation about a rapprochement between Intel and Apple, that the Santa Clara microprocessor giant could become an ardent (and high-volume) ARM SoC foundry.

As discussed here, some of this makes sense: Samsung is Apple’s biggest and most successful competitor in the smartphone/tablet space, spending billions more than anyone else in global marketing programs. At the same time, the South Korean company is Apple’s only supplier of ARM chips. Intel has the technology and manufacturing capacity to become an effective replacement for Samsung.

This wouldn’t be an easy decision for Intel: the volumes are high — as high as 415M ARM chips for 2013 according to one analyst — but the margins are low. And Intel doesn’t do low margins. Because of the Wintel duopoly, Intel’s x86 chips have always commanded a premium markup. Take Windows out of the picture and the margin disappears.

(As another aside, the 415,000 ARM chips number seems excessive. Assuming about 50 million iPhone 5s and 15 million iPads in the current quarter, and using the 4X rule of thumb for the following calendar year, we land somewhere between 250M and 300M ARM chips for Apple in 2013.)

Also, Intel would almost certainly not be Apple’s sole supplier of ARM chips. Yes, Apple needs to get out of its current and dangerous single source situation. But Tim Cook’s Supply Chain Management expertise will come into play to ensure that Apple doesn’t fall into a similar situation with Intel, that the company will secure at least a second source, such as the rumored TSMC.

The speculation by an RBC analyst that Intel will offer its services to build ARM chips for the iPhone on the condition Apple picks an x86 device for the iPad is nonsensical: Apple won’t fork iOS. Life is complicated enough with OS X on Intel and iOS on ARM.

Historically, a sizable fraction of Intel’s profits came from the following comparison. Take two microprocessor chips of equal “merit”: manufacturing cost, computing output, power dissipation… And add one difference: one runs Windows, the other doesn’t. Which one will get the highest profit margin?

In the ARM world and its flurry of customized chips and software platforms, the “runs Windows” advantage is no longer. ARM chips generate significantly lower margins than in the Intel-dominated world (its competitor AMD is ailing).

This leaves the chip giant facing a choice: It can have a meager meal at the tablet/smartphone fest, or not dine at all at the mobile table…while it watches its PC business decline.

In other news… Paul Otellini, Intel’s CEO, unexpectedly announced he’ll leave next May, a couple years ahead of the company’s mandatory 65-year retirement age. No undignified exit here. Intel’s Board pointedly stated they’ll be looking outside as well as inside for a successor, another unusual move in a company that so far stuck to successions orchestrated around carefully groomed execs. This could be seen as a sanction for Otellini missing the mobile wave and, much more important, a desire to bring new blood willing and able to look past the old x86 orthodoxy.

JLG@mondaynote.com

 

Be Sociable, Share!

Related columns:

  1. Wintel: Le Divorce Tweet The eponymous flick is mildly interesting, but we’re gathered here today to examine the Wintel breakup. After years of monogamy with the x86 architecture, Windows will soon run on ARM processors. As in any divorce, Microsoft and Intel point fingers at one another. Intel complains about Microsoft’s failure to make a real tablet OS. [...]...
  2. Intel 3-D Transistors: Why and When? TweetA few days ago, Intel teased: On May 4th, the company would make “its most significant technology announcement of the year.” Tongues wagged. Will Intel make ARM chips for Apple? The speculation has roots in reality. We’ll start with the public breakup of the Wintel marriage. At this year’s CES in January, Steve Ballmer made [...]...
  3. The Apple-Intel-Samsung Ménage à Trois TweetFascinating doesn’t do justice to the spectacle, nor to the stakes. Taken in pairs, these giants exchange fluids – products and billion$ – while fiercely fighting with their other half. Each company is the World’s Number One in their domain: Intel in microprocessors, Samsung in electronics, Apple in failure to fail as ordained by the [...]...
  4. Apple, ARM, and Intel Tweet  Apple and Samsung are engaged in a knives-out smartphone war, most infamously in the courts but, more importantly, in the marketplace. In its latest ad campaign, Samsung has cleverly “borrowed” a page from Apple’s own marketing playbook, posturing the iPhone as the choice of autumn-aged parents and brainwashed queue sheep. But when it comes [...]...
  5. 2011: Shift Happens TweetWhatever 2011 was, it wasn’t The Year Of The Incumbent. The high-tech world has never seen the ground shift under so many established companies. This causes afflicted CEOs to exhibit the usual symptoms of disorientation: reorg spams, mindless muttering of old mantras and, in more severe cases, speaking in tongues, using secret language known only [...]...

12 Comments

  1. RobDK
    Posted December 2, 2012 at 11:26 pm | Permalink

    The Intel supporters have a tendency to always be saying ‘Next year Intel will be there, with a x86 power consumption equal to ARM and same/better processing power’.

    But, they have been saying this for a couple of years. Manyana. Will they ever get there? And if they do, how does x86 meet Apple¨s requirements for custom Soc’s with integrated coding/decoding of A/V, interesting graphics refinements, etc.? One sometimes get the impression that the Intel supporters are still stuck in the world of Moore’s Law and improving CPUs, but have not woken up to the realities of the mobile world.

  2. Roger
    Posted December 3, 2012 at 2:59 am | Permalink

    Intel will wake up to reality when they see they need to idle a couple fabs (x86 growth is over) and Mr Cook is standing outside with his checkbook in hand. Lower margin revenues are better than no revenue. But really, either they run the fabs (and make chips for Apple) or they sell the fabs.

  3. RobDK
    Posted December 3, 2012 at 10:58 am | Permalink

    I would also add that asymco’s Horace Deidu has shown that Apple has been involved in extraordinarily large CapEx investments in 2012. The size of these investments equates reasonably well with the cost of a chip fab.

  4. Posted December 3, 2012 at 12:48 pm | Permalink

    It’s worth noting that running Windows on Arm isn’t the important (or difficult) bit. What people care about are applications – both mainstream apps and essential proprietary software built for particular businesses and segments.

    Almost none of these applications have been rewritten for ARM yet. I believe that’s the key reason for denoting ARM tablets as Windows RT. Basically Microsoft is saying “Warning: This looks like Windows but doesn’t run any of your software.”

    Surely that’s the reason for poor Surface RT sales? The only theoretical benefit of a Windows tablet is OS familiarity and software compatibility. With Metro UI + ARM chips they’ve killed both of those USPs.

    If I want to run regular software I need to Remote Desktop from my tablet onto a Windows PC. And, sadly for MS, I can do that comfortably from my iPad.

  5. Ted T.
    Posted December 3, 2012 at 3:11 pm | Permalink

    “(As another aside, the 415,000 ARM chips number seems excessive. Assuming about 50 million iPhone 5s and 15 million iPads in the current quarter, and using the 4X rule of thumb for the following calendar year, we land somewhere between 250M and 300M ARM chips for Apple in 2013.)”

    You seem to be assuming zero sales for the iPod Touch and growing Apple TV, both ARM processor users — I think you should go back and change your article counting those devices as well.

  6. Jean-Louis Gassée
    Posted December 3, 2012 at 9:33 pm | Permalink

    @Ted T: You’re right, I made a very rough assumption… preceded with a typo. I wanted to quote the 415M from the RBC analyst piece, instead I wrote 415,000. I did omit the iPod Touch and the Apple TV as i was just trying to show the number of ARM chips for iOS devices couldn’t exceed 300M in CY 2013 — even if we now include iPods an Apple TVs.

  7. Jean-Louis Gassée
    Posted December 3, 2012 at 9:45 pm | Permalink

    @Grant Gibson: Yes, the lack of apps is even worse than the trouble with the OS itself.
    Indeed, porting Windows to ARM wasn’t terribly difficult (even if fraught with lots niggling details at the lowest level). And the “easy” port caused trouble: it’s big, needs memory and computing power. Compare to iOS, not a port of OS X, uses parts but is pared down and tuned its intended use. Imagine a Terminal app on your iPad, or Ruby (try it, it’s all inside the Mac once you’re in Terminal). Apparently, today’s iOS needs about 3gb vs. RT 12gb or so.

  8. Hamranhansenhansen
    Posted December 4, 2012 at 1:22 am | Permalink

    How did Apple get an ARM-based 3rd party software platform? Apple gave App Store away for free with iPhones and high-end iPods for 2 years before giving it away for free with iPads for 2 years. Microsoft is giving the Windows Store away for free with some low-end PC’s (only the minority that run Windows 8 — 7 still outsells 8) and with Windows Phone 8 phones (not 7.) iPhone and iPod users might be a better app market than low-end PC users or they might not. But the thing is: it is still going to take software developers years to get Microsoft’s ARM-based app catalog to where Apple’s is today. You can’t instantly educate all interested developers in the new API’s, and you can’t grow a new Windows software project to maturity in any short amount of time, either. Early iPhone apps were basic, but outclassed everybody else on mobile. Now, iPhone and iPad apps are more sophisticated than most Windows PC apps, yet Metro has only a few basic apps. The video editors and something to match GarageBand are years away.

    Microsoft just totally blew the ARM transition. ARM outsold Intel a year or 2 ago and Microsoft was simply not prepared. Rememeber when PowerPC G5 failed to produce a notebook chip and Apple announced they had a secret Mac OS X for Intel project running for 5 years, including a PowerPC emulator for 3rd party apps, enabling them to switch to Intel within a year, “without missing a beat,” in the words of Bill Gates? What is happening now at Microsoft is the same — Intel has failed to produce a mobile chip, forcing Microsoft to switch to ARM within a year. Except Microsoft has no secret project with years of maturity ready to sub in. Microsoft has no switch to flip to bring the apps forward overnight. Apple had to switch from PowerPC to Intel or cede the notebook market to other vendors. At the time, it was unimaginable that the #1 notebook vendor (Apple) would stop selling notebooks, but it stared us in the face for a few months before the Intel announcement. Now, it is unimaginable that the #1 low-end PC maker (Windows cartel) would not sell any mobile PC’s, but it is staring us in the face right now.

    To be in the game, right now there would have to be a Microsoft Surface that is equivalent to an iPad 2 in responsiveness, free storage, and price, and includes a complete Metro app suite including the best touch Word, Excel, PowerPoint so that the user does not even feel inclined to look for more apps for the first 90 days. That would be the equivalent of the first iPhone in 2007, with all the basic apps plus the best touch iPod ever. You could buy it without caring about 3rd party apps not existing yet. Imagine if iPhone didn’t have an iPod in it specifically to make you buy an iPod nano. Imagine if iPhone lacked basic apps like Maps and that was supposed to inspire software developers to maybe build one later?

    And Microsoft even has a problem running Web apps because the latest Internet Explorer is finally standardized, but most websites detect Internet Explorer and feed it nonstandard stuff in order to work around previous versions of Internet Explorer being totally nonstandard. Microsoft blames Web developers for this but it is Microsoft’s bed.

    So I think you go back to the old thing where a company gains a monopoly and then milks it and protects it until the monopoly becomes obsolete and then the company dies. Microsoft did not think in terms of answering their user’s needs for software for a new generation of even smaller mobile computers — they thought in terms of servicing their own Wintel monopoly, which seemed endless to them.

  9. Hamranhansenhansen
    Posted December 4, 2012 at 1:28 am | Permalink

    As long as Bill Gates is the one happy Windows Tablet PC user and Steven Sinofsky is the one happy Surface with Windows RT user, then all Microsoft needs is another technology leader who wants to build himself another kooky Edsel PC using 4 years of Microsoft shareholder money. A key thing is he or she has to ensure that there is no native version of Microsoft Office for the new device.

  10. Hamranhansenhansen
    Posted December 4, 2012 at 1:40 am | Permalink

    > Apparently, today’s iOS needs
    > about 3gb vs. RT 12gb or so.

    That is not right.

    iOS 6 uses 1 gigabyte, and Keynote, Pages, Numbers, iPhoto, and iMovie (“Apple Office”) take up most of a second gigabyte. An extra gigabyte may appear to be missing because of the way all storage devices work.

    Windows RT uses 15 gigabytes, and Office uses up another 4 gigabytes. And an extra gigabyte may appear to be missing because of the way all storage devices work. You get 12 gigabytes to use for yourself on a 32GB Surface.

    A key thing with the iOS platform is that everything is optimized for the tiny, intermittent wireless network, not the giant desktop bandwidth of Ethernet and CD/DVD. So apps compress files before writing to storage, and do a million other things to be mobile-friendly. Most of Windows RT is not optimized for wireless bandwidth, it is just the same desktop Windows, unhappy to be forced to run on ARM. Like a motorcycle with the seats from a Buick.

  11. RobDK
    Posted December 4, 2012 at 9:49 am | Permalink

    @ Hamranhansenhansen

    ‘Like a motorcycle with the seats from a Buick.’

    Love it!!!

  12. Posted December 5, 2012 at 8:53 am | Permalink

    Gifts script your core feelings you have for your loved relations. Gifts are the small steps that gradually diminish the distance between two hearts. Gifts are something that makes both the giver and recipient recall the unforgettable moments spent together. Gifts are special for being special. Visit http://www.giftbasketsthailand.com for details.

2 Trackbacks

  1. By Våra lästips vecka 49 - Allt om Mac on December 9, 2012 at 9:01 am

    [...] Wintel: Le Divorce Part II [...]

  2. By Våra lästips vecka 49|TeknikGeek on December 9, 2012 at 1:25 pm

    [...] Wintel: Le Divorce Part II [...]