The cut-throat market for the chips that power smartphones and handhelds just got more competitive. In the past few days, no fewer than five semiconductors companies, including Samsung, ST Microelectronics, Texas Instruments, Qualcomm, and, yes, even Nvidia, have all announced new application processors:

• Nvidia APX 2500 press release
• Qualcomm QST-series press release
• Samsung S3C6410 press release
• ST Microelectronics Nomadik STn8820 press release
• TI OMAP3440 press release

I won’t spend a lot of time detailing the specs of each of these. (I’ve included some links to more detailed analyses of several at the end of this post.) Instead, I want to highlight some of the trends in these mobile chips, which don’t get quite as much attention as all the new eye-candy from Sony Ericsson, Samsung, LG and others announced at GSMA Mobile World Congress in Barcelona this week, but are growing in significance.

Traditionally, cell phone design has been dictated by the telecommunications companies. They have long design cycles (in other words, it takes a long time to get a handset off the drawing board and into production), use low-cost components and little memory, and are geared primarily for making and receiving calls. Data services have been slow to catch on, especially in the U.S., because of a poor user experience and high prices.

Apple’s iPhone upset this industry dynamic. Even in comparison to users of other smartphones, it’s clear that iPhone users spend significantly more time browsing the Web, watching YouTube videos, checking stock prices, and so on. Over the holidays, the iPhone accounted for more traffic to Google servers than any other mobile device, despite the fact that it has a fraction of the worldwide market share held by smartphones based on the Symbian, Windows Mobile or BlackBerry operating systems. Why? It’s a better browser.

The software gets most of the credit. But the features that make the iPhone a superior smartphone–a sophisticated user interface; a large, high-resolution display; high-quality video playback–all require more powerful hardware too. Just as Windows Vista’s Aero interface needs a decent processor (and lots of memory), a better smartphone requires a powerful application processor. In fact, the mystery application processor in the iPhone is based on the same ARM 11 series core found in the new Samsung S3C6410, and is probably very similar, even though Apple uses different model numbers.

Read the rest of this entry »

I think everyone can agree that Intel has a tad too many product brand names between its processors and the platforms that go along with them. Now it’s getting ready to do something about it. Company spokespeople have begun telling the press that Intel will simplify its product branding early next year.

Intel’s many brand names are confusing for most. The line of thinking goes something like, “Do I want VIIV? (Do I even know what VIIV is?) Or to I want Core 2 Duo? What about Centrino? And what happened to Pentium?”

Of course the answer is that Intel wants you to buy both Core 2 and VIIV. But the numerous brand names take the focus away from what Intel really wants (and needs) computer buyers to do. That is buy a model that has Intel inside. Thus, according to what Intel spokespeople have said, the company will begin slimming down the number of choices. Essentially it will ask, “Do you want Centrino or Centrino Pro? Do you want Core or do you want Core?”

There’s still a problem in that you have to understand what Core is. But that should take care of itself as Intel begins to assert the Core processor brand name, particularly on the desktop side, while somewhat downplaying its VIIV consumer and vPro enterprise brand names. It should be no surprise that Intel will continue to tout Centrino for notebooks. But it will reduce its current crop of five Centrino brand variants to two: Centrino for consumers and Centrino Pro for businesses.

Intel will turn to its marketing engine to get the word out. But that, too, has changed. Intel’s marketing engine has shifted some of its emphasis from television to the Web. (I kind of like the interactive Web ad where the dog eats the mouse pointer.) And it has changed the approach of its television ads. The gyrating Core 2 Duo commercials have been eliminated in favor of a new campaign that actually show chips versus looking like some kind of fashion show on fast forward.

It’s about time Intel got back to the point. Indeed, what it all boils down to is, “Here is our chip, please buy it.”