Convergence? Intel no!
Posted by Liz Everette on December 15, 2006
Filed Under Cellphones, Gaming | Stumble This
Intel stated last week that they are going to start developing chips for “Ultra Mobile PCs” that use less power than currently available– apparently they’ve learned a lesson since the Samsung Q1 UMPC came out with a whopping 3.5 hours of battery life. I can’t say that I’m excited about this dual device concept they’re espousing– convergence is one of the new trends that I am hoping really takes off. In addition to the standard set of items, on any given day my purse holds my phone, iPod and Nintendo DS (I lack a Palm-esque device, but I’d love to acquire one). Taking out two of those devices would not just lighten my load in a literal sense, but also for the fact that I could grab my life and go in one fell swoop– no purse or laptop bag required.
Sure, I could get a smart phone sort of device, but right now they lack the storage capacity and processor power to multi-task in a functional way for me. Plus there isn’t enough battery life to make it my sole communicating device and most importantly, they lack the ability to play fun games that go beyond the pick ‘em up and put ‘em down variety that I have on my cell phone.
I will admit– convergence hasn’t been a good thing in a lot of cases– I have love/hate ideas about music-focused devices. The ROKR? Not so good. Sprint/Verizon OTA music stores? Rather expensive, if you ask me. Cingular? Side load functionality on the new Samsung SYNCH is cool, but what about OTA downloads? Wasn’t that supposed to be the new and cool thing about all the 3G network upgrades?
I’m not even willing to bet that everyone needs a fully functional converged device. My mother doesn’t know how to download anything from her phone and really doesn’t care. Text messages are enough of a challenge for her. And I really don’t need to check my email 24/7. Or have a ready supply of decent games to play, or even have all my music near me. But I want to. And for the fact that there are plenty of people in my age demographic and younger who want to do the same (see p. 25), Intel should listen.
The one factor that could prove this as a tipping point would be wide-ranging and reasonably priced WiFi access and Skype or similar service availability. At that point my phone would prove arbitrary, except for the ventures away from the city, and with a decent enough processor, I could certainly make do on the games front.
Conclusion: wait and see. Intel’s right on the money about accessing the internet by phone (not fun), but this battle has barely begun.
Telecoms (Subscription)
| Trackback |Comments
2 Responses to “Convergence? Intel no!”
Leave a Reply
[...] But I digress. Lots of people have iPods already. Also, and more importantly, lots of people have cell phones– with a whole range of carriers, and a whole range of contracts because so much of our device hardware is subsidized. So here’s what I want to see from Apple– forget the MVNO and just sell me a $249 iPhone that is is 3G GSM capable and includes at least the option to put Opera Mini on it so that I can replace my iPod and phone (see complaint here) and not get stuck with contract woes. Filed Under: Cellphones [...]
[...] As I had previously griped about in my post on convergence, or rather, Intel’s decision not to expand beyond UMPCs, I want an all in one, completely converged device. Today Steve Jobs delivered on that and went above and beyond what I had even hoped for at this point in time. [...]