For those of you who haven't read today's Moorestown Architecture article I'd highly recommend it. This is quite possibly one of the biggest introductions we've seen in the past couple of years. I'd say that by the end of 2011 we could be looking at a dramatically different smartphone landscape.

One gem I snuck into the article was the fact that Intel has no current plans to support Windows Phone 7 or even Windows Phone 8 after it. The allegation is that Microsoft's roadmap isn't aggressive enough on the performance side. Intel needs OSes that can demand much higher performance in order to showcase Moorestown. If a 1.5GHz Moorestown performs no different than a 1GHz Snapdragon, Intel loses one of its major advantages.

This is potentially very telling about the sort of market Microsoft is going after with Windows Phone 7. If it's not the high end smartphone user, then perhaps MS is implementing more of a sweet spot strategy and targeting the informed mainstream consumer? There's also the flipside. Perhaps this is all political and there are other reasons at play for not supporting Windows Phone 7.

Based on what I've seen thus far, not having Moorestown support appears to be a bad thing.

POST A COMMENT

19 Comments

View All Comments

  • arnavvdesai - Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - link

    Intel might not support Microsoft's Windows Phone 7 but Windows could scale down normal windows or start from scratch on the core like its doing with Menlo(NT core but low power req with Silverlight UI) which could demand that high performance. Microsoft could bring out another type of device - something like the now canceled Courier which would be ideal for the next gen of Atoms(2011). However, the major type of question Intel should be asking is what type of portable and mobile applications will demand high performance? The only thing I can see happening is games & or video(but video is already adequately handled by majority of todays chipsets). Intel can demand an OS which in turn demands high performance but do the consumers want it? People are just discovering really good mobile needs.
    Another player though could be HP which could demand the processor for its next generation of slates which will run on WebOS which also has a Linux OS running in the background. I believe that would suit Intels and HPs plan to really distinguish their products. A Moorestown based WebOS platform would be something truly unique in the marketplace. HP has already said that they dont see using Win7 in their tablets because its too power hungry, WebOS is another thing altogether.
    Main question IMO is is Meego part of the (package) if you want to get off the ground running or will porting other OS be equally easy?
    Reply
  • arnavvdesai - Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - link

    Also, Anand would love to hear your thoughts on the acquisition of Palm by HP. Reply
  • numberoneoppa - Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - link

    Agreed. Palm and HP. Anand? :) Reply
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - link

    I've been meaning to, let me see if I can get time this week before I leave :)

    Take care,
    Anand
    Reply
  • PreciseInteli - Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - link

    What do they mean? That Windows Mobile 7 isn't bloated enough to require such a fast processor. That the software is optimized enough to provide adequate performance with "slower" processors. I'm glad that operating systems do not "need" faster processors. Lets keep the requirements down, dont let the devs get lazy. Reply
  • arnavvdesai - Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - link

    Its not about being lazy, its keep stuff really simple and easy to access. For instance you can push more functionality into menus which is not that hard. However, to add slide out menus or a larger screen for simpler icons requires more power since you need a larger resolution which in turn requires more graphics power. Its a huge balancing act always and software has progressed to an extent that its really hard to write bad code in large corporations. Its not about laziness Its about requirements. Reply
  • doubledeej - Thursday, May 06, 2010 - link

    I've been developing software for about 30 years and all I've seen is programmers becoming more and more lazy and less interested in writing efficient code. We've got oodles more processing capability on hardware, but our apps for the most part run slower now than they did 30 years ago. If we keep throwing hardware at the problem it is just going to continue getting worse, not better. Reply
  • seamusmc - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 - link

    You live in a different universe than the rest of us. 30 years ago i was still walking cards over to the machine. That's a damn slow bus. :D

    Without the high level languages and frameworks we have today we would still be in the 'dark ages' relatively speaking.

    20 Years ago I still did a good bit of assembly coding, that amount of effort would require years to develop applications we can do in days today. Heck much of what we can do today was impossible then.

    To assert that programs created 30 years ago were any better or efficient then they are today is naive. Applications 30 and even 20 years ago were extremely trivial to what we can do today. Additionally there were plenty of crap programmers back then. I wouldn't be surprised if the ratio was similar. (Keep in mind the number of folks actually programming back then was extremely low.)
    Reply
  • Roy2001 - Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - link

    Why they have a chance, iPhone is good, and Android is getting popular, why phone maker want to pay for the OS? Reply
  • nilepez - Saturday, May 08, 2010 - link

    I think it depends on prices. iPhone is a very expensive handset, if you include the price of the plan. Android is a better value, but it's quite possible that 7 Mobile will be as good or better. What's more, the Hero, and perhaps Android phones in general, have terrible battery life. At this point, I get up to 2 days on my ancient HTC Touch. Everyone at work with an android gets less than a day.

    If a 7 mobile device can get a day or more with normal use, I'll take that in a heartbeat over the any device that gets less.

    For now, I'll with hold judgement until I see a device. Maybe Mobile 7 is the Windows 7 of MS's mobile OS. If so, then maybe we'll end up with 3 or 4 great platforms: Android, iPhone, Web OS, 7 mobile and RIM (though I'm personally not a black berry fan).
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now