Intel Kills Embedded Processors

Intel is out of the low- and mid-range embedded market after March,
2007.  See Embedded.com story "Intel Bows Out" by Jack Ganssle at
    http://tinyurl.com/rt5sl


    ~Dave~

Dave wrote:
> Intel is out of the low- and mid-range embedded market after March,
> 2007.  See Embedded.com story "Intel Bows Out" by Jack Ganssle at
>     http://tinyurl.com/rt5sl

  Yes, something of a milestone...

Intel never moved into Flash, and indeed have done no new development
on the 6" wafer devices, for nigh on 10 years.

  So, as they say, the volumes have tapered off to the point of it
no longer being ecconomic - I don't know anyone using OTP devices :)

  It was a surprise this process lasted as long as it has.

  There are truckloads of C51 vendors out there, (indeed, it seems to
be gathering momentum recently) but the (very few) i960 and C196 users 
could be studying their options...

-jg

>Intel is out of the low- and mid-range embedded market
>after March, 2007.
>See Embedded.com story "Intel Bows Out" by Jack Ganssle
>at http://tinyurl.com/rt5sl
> ~Dave~

Even with
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:zwopVK10YkUJ:tinyurl.com/preview.php+requires-cookies-*-*-*+want-to-see-where-*-going+before-going-to-the-site
(http://tinyurl.com/preview.php), I hate TinyURL

http://www.embedded.com/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=QTQ1R241KS3IUQSNDBECKICCJUMEKJVN?articleID=188500905

jeffm_@email.com wrote:
>>Intel is out of the low- and mid-range embedded market
>>after March, 2007.
>>See Embedded.com story "Intel Bows Out" by Jack Ganssle
>>at http://tinyurl.com/rt5sl
>>~Dave~
> 
> 
> Even with
> http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:zwopVK10YkUJ:tinyurl.com/preview.php+requires-cookies-*-*-*+want-to-see-where-*-going+before-going-to-the-site
> (http://tinyurl.com/preview.php), I hate TinyURL
> 
> http://www.embedded.com/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=QTQ1R241KS3IUQSNDBECKICCJUMEKJVN?articleID=188500905

  It seems Intel wanted to argue the semantics of this :

http://www.eet.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=3I4JL1RNEIENUQSNDBESKHA?articleID=188702219

  The spokeswoman added that Intel is "not 'bowing out' of the embedded 
market at all. Embedded processors and chip sets continue to be an 
important and sizeable business for Intel, and one that we remain 
strongly committed to."

... but I don't think this new spin, actually means they will continue 
to make 87C51Fx's  :)

-jg

Dave wrote:
> Intel is out of the low- and mid-range embedded market after March,
> 2007.  See Embedded.com story "Intel Bows Out" by Jack Ganssle at
>     http://tinyurl.com/rt5sl

Hey, you don't think it could be in any way related to this article, do
you?

<http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/31/intel_to_lay_off_16000/>

Naaaaaah...

"larwe" <zwsdotcom@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1149651361.767382.78980@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Dave wrote:
>> Intel is out of the low- and mid-range embedded market after March,
>> 2007.  See Embedded.com story "Intel Bows Out" by Jack Ganssle at
>>     http://tinyurl.com/rt5sl
>
> Hey, you don't think it could be in any way related to this article, do
> you?
>
> <http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/31/intel_to_lay_off_16000/>
>
> Naaaaaah...
>
>

What a bunch of BS. A quote from the article, " Intel, of course, is one of 
those very few companies that never have laid off workers." I didnt realize 
that I quit on my own or was forced to quit in Jan of 1986. This was a lay 
off and it was the 1st in thier history. 

Jim Granville wrote:
> jeffm_@email.com wrote:
> >>Intel is out of the low- and mid-range embedded market
> >>after March, 2007.
> >>See Embedded.com story "Intel Bows Out" by Jack Ganssle
> >>at http://tinyurl.com/rt5sl
> >>~Dave~
> >
> >
> > Even with
> > http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:zwopVK10YkUJ:tinyurl.com/preview.php+requires-cookies-*-*-*+want-to-see-where-*-going+before-going-to-the-site
> > (http://tinyurl.com/preview.php), I hate TinyURL
> >
> > http://www.embedded.com/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=QTQ1R241KS3IUQSNDBECKICCJUMEKJVN?articleID=188500905
>
>   It seems Intel wanted to argue the semantics of this :
>
> http://www.eet.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=3I4JL1RNEIENUQSNDBESKHA?articleID=188702219
>
>   The spokeswoman added that Intel is "not 'bowing out' of the embedded
> market at all. Embedded processors and chip sets continue to be an
> important and sizeable business for Intel, and one that we remain
> strongly committed to."
>
> ... but I don't think this new spin, actually means they will continue
> to make 87C51Fx's  :)

No spin, the author of the article simply did not have his facts
straight.   Jack said, "Intel, the greatest embedded processor company,
will only offer Pentiums and Pentium-like CPUs for embedded apps."
Perhaps this is true if you only consider the processors in their older
product lines, (which is why they are being dropped).  The company I am
working for is using their embedded processors in our main products and
just got a briefing on the new versions of this same processor.
Doesn't anyone remember the StrongARM chips?  They may be power houses
but they are still embedded processors and are a main focus of the
embedded processor group at Intel.

I think Intel is just acknowledging that 8 bit chips don't have much of
a future and the older x86 parts are just too expensive to use for the
relative performance.  I think nearly every ARM MCU out there will
outperform a 386 these days and many of the ARMs are under $5.  How
many 386 CPUs can they still be selling???

rickman wrote:
> Jim Granville wrote:
> > jeffm_@email.com wrote:
> > >>Intel is out of the low- and mid-range embedded market
> > >>after March, 2007.
> > >>See Embedded.com story "Intel Bows Out" by Jack Ganssle
> > >>at http://tinyurl.com/rt5sl
> > >>~Dave~
> > >
> > >
> > > Even with
> > > http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:zwopVK10YkUJ:tinyurl.com/preview.php+requires-cookies-*-*-*+want-to-see-where-*-going+before-going-to-the-site
> > > (http://tinyurl.com/preview.php), I hate TinyURL
> > >
> > > http://www.embedded.com/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=QTQ1R241KS3IUQSNDBECKICCJUMEKJVN?articleID=188500905
> >
> >   It seems Intel wanted to argue the semantics of this :
> >
> > http://www.eet.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=3I4JL1RNEIENUQSNDBESKHA?articleID=188702219
> >
> >   The spokeswoman added that Intel is "not 'bowing out' of the embedded
> > market at all. Embedded processors and chip sets continue to be an
> > important and sizeable business for Intel, and one that we remain
> > strongly committed to."
> >
> > ... but I don't think this new spin, actually means they will continue
> > to make 87C51Fx's  :)
>
> No spin, the author of the article simply did not have his facts
> straight.   Jack said, "Intel, the greatest embedded processor company,
> will only offer Pentiums and Pentium-like CPUs for embedded apps."
> Perhaps this is true if you only consider the processors in their older
> product lines, (which is why they are being dropped).  The company I am
> working for is using their embedded processors in our main products and
> just got a briefing on the new versions of this same processor.
> Doesn't anyone remember the StrongARM chips?  They may be power houses
> but they are still embedded processors and are a main focus of the
> embedded processor group at Intel.

But Intel is trying to dump the Xscale (StrongArm) division.
http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=188701421

Alan Nishioka

rickman wrote:

> Doesn't anyone remember the StrongARM chips?  They may be power houses
> but they are still embedded processors and are a main focus of the
> embedded processor group at Intel.

StrongARM and XScale != ARM in general (and Intel is trying to divest
the SA stuff as well, BTW).

Intel's announcement means they have essentially given up on realtime
control applications and all the high-volume, low-margin fields like
whitegoods; they're catering primarily to PCs, PDAs and PC peripherals
(routers, etc).