Intel versus ARM for the mobile computer

The ongoing tussle between Intel and AMD has dominated the news in recent weeks, but there's another potential battleground shaping up for Intel that could have a huge impact on personal computing.

A major topic I want to cover over the next several months is the looming showdown as the smart phone industry tries to develop more powerful computers, and the PC industry tries to build smaller and smaller computers. This week has provided a decent glimpse of Intel's vision of where it thinks the industry needs to go with its Silverthorne processor, designed for a new concept of computer called the Mobile Internet Device.

This is a concept Mobile Internet Device that Intel thinks people will be able to build with its Moorestown technology. It folds in the middle, like a book.

(Credit: Tom Krazit/CNET News.com)

We're looking at a major architectural battle over the next three years or so: the ARM instruction set, which dominates mobile phones, versus the x86 instruction set (Intel, please stop calling it Our Architecture). ARM isn't widely known outside the industry, but it designs processor cores for chips that power more than 90 percent of the mobile phones on the planet. Intel, you've probably heard of at one time or another.

Both companies and their partners will be aggressively courting computer users and software developers over the next several years. Intel is trying to find its next big source of growth by scaling down into power-sensitive areas such as MIDs, which are basically minitablet computers. ARM wants chip makers to use its cores in more powerful smart phones, such as Apple's iPhone, which uses an ARM-based chip made by Samsung. Both companies need the support of software developers who will be developing applications for their devices, and whoever has the best combination of compelling design and need-to-have applications will have the early lead as the first quarter of the computer industry winds to a close.

I'll get ARM's side of the story in more detail over the coming days. But Intel is contending that it has a major advantage in that all the software developed on and for PCs will run on its Silverthorne chips for MIDs, said Anand Chandrasekher, senior vice president and general manager of Intel's ultra mobility group.

Chandrasekher asserted that software developed for chips based on ARM cores aren't necessarily compatible. He said that's because ARM's licensees implement slightly different combinations of ARM technology, and there are no APIs (application programming interfaces) that lets application developers write an application that will run across those many different implementations. "If a smart phone is going to become more of a data oriented device, then it's going to have to run applications, then compatibility matters," he said.

Is that an upside-down iPhone? Nope, it's an upside-down shot of another Moorestown concept device.

(Credit: Tom Krazit/CNET News.com)

Intel is promising that any and all software written for PCs will run on MIDs. This does appear to be a more compelling argument for a software developer trying to decide where to place its bets. However, that's hardly a stamp of approval for the MID project at large.

If we've learned one thing this summer, it's that people are finally ready to start figuring out what they want on a mobile handheld device. The physical design matters, the user interface matters, and the applications matter. The key question is in what proportions. Intel might have an advantage when it comes to application development (although ARM probably has a retort), but will that matter in a world where more and more applications are probably going to delivered over the Internet?

I'd like to try and figure this out. Watch our site for a longer piece examining the two chip instruction sets and what they bring to the fight. This will take years to evolve, with things probably starting to heat up around the time Intel releases Moorestown, the successor to Silverthorne. Chandrasekher isn't saying much about Moorestown, but Intel is showing off these concept devices as a preview of what it thinks will be possible with that chip. One of them looks awfully familiar.

[chrisfrary]

This Isn't the answer

Sadly programs are bearily optimized for speed and memory on larger platforms. No one wants something made for a desktop laptop sucking up power and resources on a cell phone. Programs will still have to be rewritten then recompiled. I suppose developers that otherwise wouldn't make software for these devices would. Other than that, no.

[aka_tripleB]

Not widely know outside the industry

Well, maybe. But the Nintendo does use two in its DS system. That might help ARM get market share. People will think: "ARM does work well in my DS, so it'll be good in my MID."

[Nick Westgate]

Everyone uses ARM without realising it.

All Apple iPods use them.<br /><br />In addition to the Nintendo DS mentioned in another comment, many other MP3 players, most Windows CE devices, and many cell phones use ARM too.<br /><br />The list goes on: set top boxes, digital TVs, digital cameras, printers, routers, GPS receivers,<br />many many embedded systems (wristwatches, calculators, point of sale terminals, medical equipment etc).<br /><br />Even the hard drive in your PC may contain an ARM chip (Seagate Cheetah series).<br /><br />The irony is that much of this silicon is produced by ... Intel! Yes, Intel licences the ARM core too. So of course they want that slice of the pie!<br /><br />Cheers,<br />Nick.

[b.k.m]

x86 yes, Windows no

Hitherto, the x86 architecture has been nearly synonymous with "Wintel," though it by no means has to be (OSX, Solaris, Linux etc. etc.)<br /><br />The problem is that Windows on mobile internet devices has consistently flopped (CE, Pocket PCs, iPaqs, and most recently "ultra mobile PC's.") Heaven help those who bought a phone that runs Windows.<br /><br />Now I am not an irrational Windows-basher. It's the best OS for PC's and most (by quantity) servers (that can tolerate monthly patching/reboots). But for mobile devices, it is not well adapted as evidenced by its market share.<br /><br />So is Intel proposing a real alternative? A platform that has the compatibility of an API like that of Windows, but which isn't Windows?

[Tom Krazit]

They are putting a lot of emphasis on Linux

They are very careful to iterate their support for Microsoft, but they didn't have Mark Shuttleworth of Canonical (Ubuntu) on stage at IDF for nothing. There's still a lot of work needed, but it will be very interesting to watch how Intel and the Linux community approach mobile devices.

[lightandshadow68]

iPhone Running OS X

While binary compatibility seems to be a plus for non-portable <br />operating systems like Vista, Apple doesn't seem to be having <br />problems porting it's OS to other architectures, including ARM. <br /><br />Windows Mobile doesn't run the NT kernel, but the iPhone is <br />running a version of OS X.

[eyemahsource]

Headphones for your eyes

Conventional thinking needs to be pushed aside. You can't <br />shrink your ears so we made headphones. You can't shrink your <br />fingers so we made data gloves. You can't shrink your eyes so <br />we made near-eye displays. These are wearable things, <br />inherently both private and portable. They are very low power. <br />Combine them with the equivalent to a MacBook Pro regarding <br />ports and leave off the screen, both drives, keyboard, speakers, <br />mic, camera and use a 64 Gig flash drive and hot-swapable <br />Lithium Titanate (explosion proof) batteries. Make it look like a <br />tiny MacBook Pro with ports all around. Use a butt bag, purse, <br />small backpack, shoulder holster. If the near eye display can <br />look like designer glasses and give me 1920 x 1200 resolution <br />then I assure you people would be trashing their desktops, <br />laptops, palmtops, phones, iPods for the final form factor: The <br />iTop. Combine it with a laser engine projector and you are <br />complete.