POST A COMMENT

17 Comments

Back to Article

  • jibberegg - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link

    What's the reason for not having quad band support? Does the different chIp really reduce the BoM enough to justify it? Reply
  • S_Constantinescu - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link

    Knowing ZTE, if they can save a penny then they'll save that penny. Reply
  • Penti - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link

    Probably because it's geared for other markets, here in Sweden we use 900 MHz and 2100 MHz for 3G/W-CDMA/HSPA+ as well as GSM bands 900MHz, and 1800MHz it's pretty standard for the whole of EMEA market. We also have LTE at 800MHz and 2600MHz of course. Maybe also at 900MHz at some point when transceivers/RF-parts supports more bands on LTE and they change around their old GSM stuff. I think this looks really good, as a smartphone/computing device. Would love to have a half decent camera in my next phone though. Strange not to support 850MHz GSM however. Would be vital for many markets. But I've seen that before from ZTE-phones.
    I see they have dedicated buttons, wounder why they opted for it.
    Reply
  • BSMonitor - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link

    ARM is going to regret taunting Intel.

    Even if ARM processors outperform Intel Atom's by 10-20% as of now.. Intel has a huge lead on all other chip Fabs in terms of raw production capacity. Add to the that, a lead on 14 and 22nm and 450mm wafer technology. Intel will probably be able to undercut pricing of the various ARM Fabs by any amount they wish. Their margins are ridiculous already, add to that tiny Atom cores on 450mm wafers.

    Bottom line, MOST smart phone owners have no idea what's under the hood. x86, ARM, it's not going to matter to them. And Intel can deliver when pushed to do so, aka. Apple, Google, etc..

    ARM should have just left the den quietly.. Not a good idea to kick the sleeping bear.
    Reply
  • chucknelson - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link

    Sounds like good competition to me. Let's see what Intel can do :) Reply
  • jwcalla - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link

    Come on, this is silly. Not that Intel doesn't have a shot here and they definitely will gain market share, but the super-phones are making the sales and they'll lead the way. Like you say, people don't care if it's x86 or ARM as long as it's a Galaxy S or iPhone. Why would Samsung buy chips from Intel when they can make their own and cut out the middleman? And why would Apple depend on Intel when they can design their own chip, not to mention that Apple's compiler toolchain doesn't really yield great performance on x86.

    Intel will have to go above and beyond their competition to bring significant partners on board IMO, and even then they'll be forced into competitive prices. Teh internets claim a Tegra 3 is $25 and we all know teh internets are never wrong.

    And all this assumes that Intel's ARM binary translation performance is truly up to snuff.

    All that said, Intel does have a Motorola phone lined up so that'll be the first true test of consumer interest.
    Reply
  • DanNeely - Friday, August 31, 2012 - link

    Samsung has used 3rd party chips in their phones before. The reason behind doing so is that requiring their semiconductor division to compete with rivals will prevent it from becoming complacent due to a guaranteed internal market for its product. Reply
  • Penti - Saturday, September 01, 2012 - link

    Well the real idea behind that is that their divisions (companies now days even) are separated. I have a Samsung screen with a Taiwanese panel, it's the monitor division that handles the sourcing not the panel making business or fabs. Companies don't source from themselves automatically. You have Qualcomm, ST-E, TI etc supplying application processors and even more companies supplying radio/modem hardware too. They are interested in selling devices, they just happen to have a business that designs chips too. It's not designed around some proprietary chips as their semiconductor business weren't exactly set up to supply them that way. It's not like when companies merge and replaces everything with their own tech. You do that to kill competition and Samsung's semi business is aimed at a larger market and don't compete against themselves.

    Samsung on the other hand has no reason to switch to x86 or MIPS just because of the Android SDK/NDK (at some level) support for those platforms. But there are many other players around, ZTE, Huawei, Motorola Mobility, Lenovo, Kyocera, LG, Pantech, Asus, Acer, HTC, in Japan you also have NEC/Casio, Fujitsu, Toshiba, Panasonic and Sharp and so on. So you have many clients for Intel ones chip and software support is a no-brainer. An attractive platform appeals to most. Maybe even Samsung as they don't tend to lift up the processor/tech but product. A growing (smartphone) market will obviously have room for them. You sell platforms not chips most of the time. Handset makers just care about their end-customers or telecom customers if Intel fits it will sell quite well. It's not much of a problem. It's not like Samsungs chips is geared for the really low end devices that Intel can't compete with either. Samsung semiconductor business can always sell or fab for other customers. They where the ones designing the A4 together with a Texas business that Apple later bought. Besides somebody needs to deliver the DRAM and NAND to Intel platforms too. In this business it's seldom about trying to undermine your competitors that you obviously work with at some level.
    Reply
  • Patflute - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link

    Terrible res for the size of the screen. Reply
  • Patflute - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link

    Ew is this thing not even Android 4.0? Reply
  • S_Constantinescu - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link

    It is 4.0 ICS. Reply
  • plewis00 - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link

    How exactly is it 'terrible res for the size of the screen'? It's exactly the same size and resolution as the HTC Sensation and Sensation XE and better than the Sensation XL. For what will be a mid-range phone most likely this is perfectly fine... Reply
  • DukeN - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link

    Or they'll have an iLawsuit on their hands Reply
  • Malih - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link

    the design is like the SIII but with the back chin/curve like the SII Reply
  • B3an - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link

    Really dont like how these phones have the "Intel Inside" logo on them.

    Looks tacky. It already ruins to look of Windows ultrabooks.
    Reply
  • raddude9 - Friday, August 31, 2012 - link

    probably part of Intel's "Reward system", they probably get a few extra $'s for each phone that has the olgo Reply
  • shunya901 - Monday, September 03, 2012 - link

    http://commonprosperity.org/
    Dear friends, do you want to have some different things? Whether you want to give your relatives and friends,

    take a few different exotic gifts? Whether you want to buy some cheap benefits of thing? So please, let us

    begin now! Click on our website (http://commonprosperity. org/) Will bring you different surprise,

    commonprosperity.org@hotmail.com
    ............ ./′ˉ/'...'/ˉ/`

    ........../'/.../..../...../ˉ\

    ........('(...′...′....ˉ~ /')

    .........\.................'../

    ..........\................../

    ............\..............(

    ..............\.............\....http://www.frankfushi.com/
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now