Wondering out loud . . .
"My understanding is that the Microsoft spec. for the Tablet PC is causing more than a few headaches, not least of which are having to fit designs around a portable oven."
Bird, your statement last night got me wondering if a strong pattern is developing, one that may enrich TMTA (and us!) enormously. Please help me connect the dots.
Recent months have seen the major Japanese PC mfgs launch a number of small form-factor PCs with TMTA chips: Fujitsu's P-2040, 2020, 1000 Lifebook models; Sony's Vaio C1 GT1; NEC's LaVie Z; Toshiba's Libretto. These state of the art companies can and do use INTC and AMD chips for larger laptops, but there seems a clear trend to the use of the TM5600 and 5800 when the design calls for a small form factor PC, one which is likely to be truly mobile (and thereby requiring low energy consumption and a cool casing). Obviously, more are planned, as evidenced by the Sony Vaio "U" we have been discussing. (Yes, I am assuming it features a TMTA chip, but I think it is a safe assumption). I cannot think of a small form factor competitive laptop being offered recently with a PIII/Duron/Athlon.
There have not been many introductions of Tablet PCs to date, but the ones we have seem are also built around the TM5600 and 5800; eg, FIC's private label offerings and the PaceBlade. Ditto the Web pads offered to date; eg, offerings from Toshiba, Sonic Blue, FIC and NEC.
All this makes me wonder if, from an engineering standpoint, it is even possible to design a marketable small factor, truly mobile laptop, Tablet PC or WebPad without a TMTA chip. As the casing gets smaller, the thermodynamic issues of heat dissipation become very challenging. This would seem to be greatly exacerbated by constraints which bring an LCD screen in close thermodynamic proximity with the chip, as is inherently the situation with the Tablet PCs and WebPads (also laptops operating, but closed).
Looking a little off into the future, could a Metapad core be designed wtih anything other than a TMTA chip? Xybernaut's wearable computer is based on a PIII-M, but it is a surprisingly large, clumsy-looking waistpack thing. One would think that Xybernaut would be well advised to re-engineer around a TMTA chip. The ViA CPU unit, by comparison, is considerably smaller.
Why did INTC preannounce the Banias, perhaps 12 to 18 months before introduction (assuming it ever is introduced)? Could Intel be sending a message that their OEMs should hold on and not adopt TMTA, because INTC will soon have a killer mobile chip? How about the challeges facing the design teams at Intel-Israel. They are tasked to produce a new chip which runs adequately but runs cool, yet they are severely hemmed in by TMTA patents. I doubt that tailored transistors are going to solve that problem, so what do they do? Interesting challenge, that.
Idle rumblings, and I am probably guilty of selective recall here, but I would appreciate your insights. I am becoming more and more optimistic about our chances, perhaps getting to a point where we own the mobile x86 chip market at that moment in time when that market experiences a demand-driven explosion. Would be nice.
regards, wsh
AI
