Intel releases ‘optimized’ Android 4.2 release, hinting it will dual-boot with Windows 8

Intel has been missing out on the Android party ever since ARM came and stole Google’s heart with its power-efficient and affordable processors, but the major microprocessor manufacturer is already hard at work trying to woo Android. Intel has just released a pre-alpha build of an “Intel-Optimized” edition of Android, meaning that the Operating System may very well come in future PCs dual-booting alongside Windows.

The idea of dual-booting Windows and Android is old news, but doing it with a standard Intel x86 processor has yet to be accomplished. While devices like the ASUS Transformer AIO allow you to run both, they actually utilize two different processors, an Intel and an ARM processor, to do it. This new accomplishment by Intel is putting the notion of native dual-booting Windows and Android close to reality.

Android was built from the ground up in ARM architecture, but Intel’s new pre-alpha is suggesting the company is investing time and money into porting it for x86 processors – namely Intel ones. The company has been working on contributing x86-based Android components for years now, but this most recent development is for Android’s latest version, Jelly Bean 4.2.2, and means Intel is keeping up with the updates to perhaps someday bring a fully fledged port to its x86-based tablets and PCs – likely along with its new Intel Atom Clover Trail series of low-power processors. This means we may be only a year or less away from having PCs that dual-boot Windows and Android.

While Intel deserves credit for such hard work, it’s also worth noting they are far from the first to try this. The Android x86 project is itself a complete port of Android Jelly Bean and has been hard at working bringing Android to netbooks since 2011. Intel has more money and more manpower than this independent group of developers, and has actually contributed to Android x86 through its open source releases, but what matters more here is that Android is getting closer than ever to being an option on a PC just like Windows, bringing with it a large community of application developers and other projects.

Unfortunately, there is a disadvantage to running Android in an x86 architecture: all applications made for ARM-based Android devices will not work unless they are re-compiled for the x86 architecture or are emulated. This means that every game, program or utility on Android has to be rebuilt for x86 architecture in order to work, and while much more efficient than emulation, will mean that most applications will not work out of the box for Intel-based Android devices. In the end though, if enough people are interested in the power of the Atom, then there will certainly be plenty of  applications by the time Intel releases its first Android-Windows tablet, perhaps offering one of the most versatile tablets on the market.

Joshua Sherman is a contributor for Digital Trends who writes about all things mobile from Apple to Zynga. Josh pulls his knowledge from years of experience using smartphones and tablets of all shapes and sizes, and has had his content featured on other top sites like MakeUseOf. Josh is a student at Vassar College.

View the original article here

Samsung and Intel introduce open operating system Tizen

In the mobile world, Android is one of the dominating forces. So it’s always refreshing to see some new potential competition join the game which, as CNET reported, is just what happened this week at the Mobile World Congress. Pioneered by Samsung and Intel, Tizen is an open operating system which could draw in some major attention from mobile carriers because they are invited to play around with it and customize it for themselves, something most other OS’s don’t allow.

The reason carriers are so interested in having control over a phone’s operating system? It will allow them to maintain more of the interaction between its subscribers and the apps that they download. We can only imagine this would result in them being able to either put an end to, or take a cut of, the money that some of the bigger companies make via their apps. (Of the two, the latter makes more sense.)

Speaking of apps, though the Tizen Association won’t disclose numbers, it said that, by launch, there will be thousands of apps ready for users to download. No word yet on which apps will be available, but a good guess is that the top dogs – Facebook, Twitter, and Foursquare, for example – will likely be among them.

Samsung will release the first line of Tizen-operated phones, with Huawei models following suit shortly after. Europe-based Orange and Japan-based NTT Docomo are the first two carriers that have agreed to offer phones operating on Tizen, with the latter being the first to launch with Samsung models this summer. Orange says that by next year, they’ll introduce the phones to emerging markets, which could be a tough sell; the first Tizen phones will likely be priced in the $300 range, whereas phones in emerging markets typically fall in the $100 range.

We’re looking to see what the introduction of this operating system will do to the mobile market. No word yet whether it will make its way to the U.S. market; it will probably depend on how well it fares overseas.

Spending a childhood engrossed in such technologically inspiring television shows like Voltron, Small Wonder, and Power Rangers, it's really no surprise that all things digital would continue to inspire Josh to the point that he would one day make a living writing about the things he loves. After graduating from SUNY Purchase in 2006 with a degree in journalism/anthropology, he spent years working as an editor for Travel + Leisure. Josh doesn't look forward to a Cylon takeover, but he does eagerly await the day he can become half cyborg.

View the original article here

Can Intel reinvent itself when CEO Paul Otellini leaves?

Intel CEO Paul Otellini is retiring in May. Could a change in leadership ironically help the chipmaking giant keep up with mainstream computing?

Intel CEO Paul Otellini surprised the technology industry this week by announcing he would be retiring from the company in May 2013 after helping the company work through a leadership transition. Most industry watchers (and even the company’s chairman Andy Bryant) had expected Otellini to stay on at Intel for several more years. After all, leadership transitions at Intel are rare. The company has had only five CEOs in its 44-year history, and Otellini has been an Intel employee for 40 of those.

Otellini gave no specific reasons for his departure, save to note “it’s time to move on and transfer Intel’s helm to a new generation of leadership.” 

Paul Otellini is generally credited with having kept the company’s nose to the grindstone on semiconductor design and manufacturing – and cornering about 80 percent of the PC market as a result. However, on Otellini’s watch, Intel has also been caught flatfooted by the mobile revolution. And where the PC market is stagnating, mobile is experiencing tremendous growth, mostly without “Intel inside.”

What does Otellini’s departure mean for Intel, and could new leadership bring a new direction to the company? Perhaps one that bring cheaper PCs and a new generation of mobile devices?

Looking at Otellini’s tenure in Intel’s top chair, it’s important to consider Intel’s past. In the early 2000s, Intel found its market leadership challenged by AMD, which, in addition to bringing antitrust complaints, was able to undercut Intel on price just as demand for Intel’s most profitable chips dropped after the dot-com bust.

When Otellini came on board, he introduced the now-famous “tick-tock” model of annual processor updates: the “tocks” bringing advances in microarchitecture, while the “ticks” br0ught advances in manufacturing, essentially, making the “tick” processors smaller and more power-efficient. Otellini bet heavily on semiconductor design and manufacturing plants, and wound up bringing more than 20,000 new hires on board (although he was forced to lay off more than 10,000 other people shortly thereafter).

Otellini also expanded the company’s markets by putting Intel processors into places and products where PCs still had room to make inroads, including “digital home” offerings, enterprise, the health industry, and mobility. However, mobility largely meant notebook computers – not phones or tablets.

On the PC side, it paid off. Intel’s first “tock” were the original Core 2 processors in 2006, which brought a significant leap in processor performance and proved Intel could still develop technology that left competitors in the dust. The designs landed just as the industry was seriously converting to 64-bit architectures. The Core processors were also enough of an advance that they convinced Apple to drop IBM/Motorola PowerPC processors – a huge PR coup for Intel. The “tick” in 2007 shrunk those technologies down to 45nm.

The next “tock” in 2008 brought the first Core i3/i5/i7 processors, while the “tick” in early 2010 shrunk those down to 32nm. In 2011, Intel “tocked” again with Sandy Bridge (which had a $700 million hiccup), then “ticked” earlier this year with Ivy Bridge and a 22nm process. The next “tock,” dubbed Haswell, should land by mid-2013, and the “tick” in 2014 should be Broadwell, the first processor to use a 14nm process. Other chipmakers like AMD, Qualcomm, and Samsung aren’t demonstrating manufacturing and chip design expertise at Intel’s level. Simply put, Intel processor technology truly is leading the market.

These advances also kept investors happy by raking in money. On Otellini’s watch, Intel saw its global revenue jump from $39 billion a year to $54 billion. The company has also paid out some $23.5 billion to investors. Otellini also cleared clouds from the companies horizons by resolving antitrust cases with both AMD and the Federal Trade Commission (with no fines), although it’s still appealing a $1.34 billion antitrust fine from the European Union.

Intel’s technology is solid, but two things happened during Otellini’s tenure that have put Intel on shaky ground: the global economic recession, and the revolution in smartphone and mobile technologies.

A worldwide economic downturn meant both consumers and businesses put buying new PCs on hold, hoping to cut costs by milking their existing systems for an additional year or two, meaning less demand for processors and less growth in the PC market.

Consumers’ and enterprises’ embrace of smartphones and tablets – sometimes as replacements for traditional notebook computers – further crimped demand for PCs and Intel processors. Despite repeatedly trying to make low-power, low-cost processors for mobile devices (like its Atom line and even earlier efforts), Intel chips drive almost no mobile devices. Instead, most phones and tablets are powered by processors based on designs from the UK’s ARM Holdings, and are manufactured by the likes of Samsung and Qualcomm.

How bad is it? With a market cap of about $100 billion, Intel is the world’s biggest chipmaker in terms of revenue. On paper, however, it’s been eclipsed by Qualcomm, with a market cap of $106 billion, surpassing Intel largely due to the strength of its Snapdragon ARM-based processors.

Otellini’s approach to mobile seems to be that design advances from its flagship processors and the Wintel ecosystem will eventually trickle down and also power mobile devices, which is (loosely) the premise behind the Atom line. Despite some progress, such as a version of Android for Intel chips, Intel’s complex microarchitectures are originally designed for PCs. Making them power-efficient and backward-compatible is no small feat.

Intel also puts a premium price on its ability to run x86 software, which initially meant the sales proposition for Intel’s mobile processors amounted to we’re more expensive and use more power than our competition! In contrast, ARM processors are designed to be simple and power-efficient from the word go. While ARM processors aren’t compatible with the x86 world, they are more efficient and less expensive than Intel’s offerings. In fact, Apple is working on its own hand-optimized processor designs rather than relying on Intel, which makes the most advanced processor technology available.

This year, Intel claimed its Medfield line of single-core Atom processors were competitive enough with ARM systems to power smartphones. So far, there have been few takers, with Motorola’s Razr i being the best-known example. Intel’s next dual-core mobile processors, dubbed Clover Trail, are supposed to outshine ARM processors, serve as the heart of devices that can run x86 software, and offer all-day batter life and 30 days of standby time. Clover Trail was supposed to ship this quarter, powering a wide range of tablets and slates running Windows 8. However, Intel has yet to announce a launch date, meaning device makers hoping to ride Windows 8's launch have now missed the wave.

Even as the traditional PC market stalls and (eventually) shrinks thanks to widespread use of mobile devices, Otellini’s unexpected resignation could present an opportunity for Intel to reinvent itself and remain a ubiquitous force in mainstream computing. RBC Capital Markets analyst Doug Freedman wrote in a research note that “[a] shift in leadership could be welcome news to investors as Intel could be in greater position to broaden its portfolio into higher growth markets.” But how?

Show ‘em how it’s done – It used to be unthinkable that either pillar of the Wintel ecosystem,  Microsoft or Intel, would try to tell hardware partners like HP, Dell, Acer, Lenovo, or Toshiba what to do. Microsoft broke that rule with its new Surface tablets, choosing to compete directly with its hardware partners to achieve a more Apple-like (or Xbox-like) vertical integration. Intel stepped close to that line with Ultrabooks, laying out basic specs that OEMs had to meet in order for the laptop to officially be called an Ultrabook. If Intel really wants to prove its mobile technology can compete with the likes of Samsung, Qualcomm, and Apple, Intel needs to make its own mobile devices. They could run Android; they could run Windows 8; they could run something entirely new. But if Intel truly wants to be a ubiquitous force in computing for the next couple of decades, it’s going to need a major presence in the mobile market. So far, OEMs aren’t stepping up, so it might be up to Intel to disrupt the mobile market all on its own.

Cut prices – Building multi-billion-dollar chip fabrication plants isn’t cheap, but, in the short-to-medium term, Intel can improve demand for its PC chips by cutting prices. One of the reasons Ultrabooks have so far failed to ignite the PC market is that they’re just too darn expensive – and a lot of that expense is Intel’s processors. Intel threw hundreds of millions of dollars at Ultrabook development but refused to drop or subsidize the cost of its processors, forcing manufacturers to ship pricey Ultrabooks or cut costs on everything but the processor (sometimes resulting in chintzy messes). Cheaper processors mean cheaper PCs, and that means more demand and volume for Intel chips. Plus, it’s a good way to continue to assert superiority over AMD.

Think outside the x86 box – Intel’s x86 architecture has been around for decades, and, ironically, so have the simpler ARM-based designs that are now powering mobile devices. The solution to Intel’s mobile problem is not licensing ARM processors. That’s antithetical to the company’s DNA. The heart of Intel is microprocessor design and manufacturing. Instead of focusing all efforts on extending the x86 ecosystem, Intel could apply some of its world-class brainpower towards the next revolution in microprocessors as well as the manufacturing technologies that will make them possible. Starting from a clean slate with no baggage, Intel is arguably the best-positioned company on the planet to develop the architecture that drives mainstream computing well into the second half of the 21st century. Are we really expecting x86 or ARM to get us there?

Intel has had only five CEOs in its corporate history, and they’ve all been company veterans promoted from within. Intel plans to look at both internal and outside candidates to fill the CEO position, but current Intel execs most certainly have the inside track. 

The leading internal candidates would seem to be Renee James (currently head of Intel’s software business), Brian Krzanich (COO and manufacturing head), and CFO/strategy chief Stacy Smith. Although Otellini came from the marketing side of the company, Intel has a tendency to favor engineering experience in the top seat. Krzanich may have a bit of a lead in that case, but Intel is not lacking in executive talent.

It’s not clear whether internal candidates steeped in Intel’s current business model will have the ambition and force of personality to divert Intel from the path it’s followed since the 1980s. Intel has known for over a decade that it needs to diversify its business, and it still isn’t there yet. Unless something fundamental changes with the Clover Trail mobile processor offerings – and there’s no indication of that happening – Intel needs to do more than keep on keeping on … and that argues in favor of a CEO from outside the company.

View the original article here

Intel CEO Paul Otellini retiring after 40 years

After nearly 40 years, Intel's president and the company's fifth CEO, Paul Otellini, is heading for retirement.

Intel today announced that its president and CEO Paul Otellini will retire after 40 years of work at the computing innovation company. 

Otellini will step down at the company’s annual shareholder meeting in May 2013. The move will take place over the next six months as an orderly leadership transition, during which the board of directors will choose Otellini’s successor by considering internal and external candidates.

“Paul Otellini has been a very strong leader, only the fifth CEO in the company’s great 45-year history, and one who has managed the company through challenging times and market transitions,” Andy Bryant, chairman of the board, said in a press release from Intel. “The board is grateful for his innumerable contributions to the company and his distinguished tenure as CEO over the last eight years.”

Otellini said he will collaborate with Bryant, the board of directors, and the management team during the six-month transition period. Afterward, he will be available as an advisor to management.

“I’ve been privileged to lead one of the world’s greatest companies,” he said. “After almost four decades with the company and eight years as CEO, it’s time to move on and transfer Intel’s helm to a new generation of leadership.” 

During Otellini’s tenure as CEO, from the end of 2005 through the end of 2011, Intel’s annual revenue climbed from $38.8 billion to $54 billion and annual earnings-per-share surged from $1.40 to $2.39. Under Otellini, Intel successfully began producing low-power Intel Core processors that, when paired with solid-state drives and unibody chassis, created what we now know as the Ultrabook. 

Intel also announced some pretty major promotions of three senior leaders to the position of executive vice president: Renee James, head of Intel’s software business; Brian Krzanich, CEO and head of worldwide manufacturing; and Stacy Smith, CFO and director of corporate strategy.

With the mobile market almost exclusively using ARM chips, whoever takes over as Intel’s CEO will have a lot of work to do in order to stay relevant. After all, ARM chips are in nearly all U.S. smartphones as well as Apple’s extremely popular iPad. There are already rumors of Apple ditching its Intel chips for ARM processors in its iMacs and MacBooks, so the following year should be an interesting one for Intel.

View the original article here

Qualcomm puts their Snapdragon from 2010 against new mobile chip from Intel

There's been a lot of talk about Intel's new mobile Atom chip on the Internet, and the people at Qualcomm wanted to remind us about how their offering stacks up against it. Qualcomm innards are found on some of todays most powerful Android phones, like the U.S. versions of the Galaxy S3, or the upcoming LG Optimus G, but that's not what Qualcomm is showing us here.

They're using an Xperia Arc, complete with the 2010 version of the Snapdragon in it and pitting it up against what certainly looks like an Intel-powered Orange San Diego, released this summer.

Yes, I'm sure the scenarios were cherry-picked and there are likely areas where the Atom outperforms the Snapdragon, but it's fun to watch. We'd love to see Intel counter with a video of their own, as the more these companies compete against each other the better the products get and the lower the price -- things we're very much in favor of.

Source: Qualcomm on Youtube

View the original article here

Motorola and Intel, Nexus 7 3G and is the SGS 3 still worth it? [From the Forums]

Just in case you missed out on some of the Android news today, now is the time to go ahead and get yourself fully caught up. Here on the blogs and in the Android Central Forums there is plenty to talk about. Have some questions? Need some help or just looking to chat Android? You know where to go, check out some of the threads below to get started.

We've got nearly 1 million members helping members and nearly 2 million posts in our Android Forums. Are you one of them? Join today!

"Born and raised in Nova Scotia, Canada. Chris is fluent in all mobile languages and loves anything with a power button."

View the original article here