Back to Article

  • MajGenRelativity - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    I understand the reasoning for changing it, but Snapdragon SoC would sound more specific than Snapdragon Platform. Reply
  • Mo3tasm - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    Exactly why they're avoiding it. Reply
  • Murloc - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    SoC is a technical acronym though. Reply
  • DanNeely - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    Are all the RF bits integrated into the SOC? AFAIK the analog parts are traditionally left out since they play best with different process configurations than are used for digital transistors. Reply
  • Matt Humrick - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    Only the baseband processor (modem) is part of the SoC. The rest of the RF chain is external. Reply
  • Yojimbo - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    SoC implies a piece of hardware. Qualcomm wants to call it a platform because they want to highlight the software and services that are part of what they offer. Reply
  • Meteor2 - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    I do wonder how much typical consumers care.

    Reminds me of Centrino. I never did really understand what that meant.
  • Yojimbo - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    Yeah, who knows. These are the types of things that get passed around at conferences or just by companies looking at what other companies are doing, I think. For instance, all of a sudden it seemed it was popular for universities all over the country to put climbing walls into their recreational centers. I think being a "platform company" is the latest corporate buzz in the technology world. Certainly it's not just a vapid phrase, though. Companies that provide software and services along with their hardware can maintain higher margins than those providing just hardware. Reply
  • lmcd - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    Doesn't help that Centrino went from something like "Snapdragon 400" to "Snapdragon augment platform" Reply
  • socalbigmike - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    Centrino is still used to this day! It means Wi-Fi on the Dye. Reply
  • BrokenCrayons - Friday, March 17, 2017 - link

    Actually the Centrino brand name has evolved over the years at least once. At no point did it ever mean on-die wireless. Here's a direct quote from Wikipedia that accurately describes what in meant previously and what it means in the present day:

    "Centrino is a brand name of Intel Corporation which represents its Wi-Fi and WiMAX wireless computer networking adapters. Previously the same brand name was used by the company as a platform-marketing initiative. The change of the meaning of the brandname occurred on January 7, 2010.

    The old platform-marketing brand name covered a particular combination of mainboard chipset, mobile CPU and wireless network interface in the design of a laptop. Intel claimed that systems equipped with these technologies delivered better performance, longer battery life and broader wireless network interoperability than non-Centrino systems."

  • ikjadoon - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    Maybe Qualcomm could make a stand on Android updates via a premium level of SoCs that will get guaranteed BSP updates for 4 years, instead of the "24 months if we can find some free time on the weekends".

    Platforms don't usually get depreciated every two years.
  • shabby - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    Google just doesn't care about your updates. Reply
  • socalbigmike - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    Amen. Reply
  • JoeMonco - Friday, March 17, 2017 - link

    But then how would Qualcomm get people to buy the new platform? Reply
  • name99 - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    Note what is missing from the slides. References to technologies that you've never heard of (iZat? Aqstic?) but no reference to Zeroth?
    Someone in QC brand management is going to have to find alternative employment soon...

    The other issue is why focus on Snapdragon as the brand rather than doing a better job of pumping up Qualcomm?

    I think the answer to both of these is that QC plans a MASSIVE push into servers. So I assume the logic is something like
    - when people hear QC they will think "super awesome total technology company"
    - when they hear Snapdragon will think "super awesome MOBILE technology"
    (right now QC and Snapdragon both trigger the same set of connotations, primarily mobile, and that's what QC want's to change)
    - when people hear Centriq (or whatever the final brand will be) they will think "super awesome SERVER technology"
    (and the idea is that Zeroth is primarily promoted as being part of that server world, rather than improving your mobile device? That's basically the same theory that Intel has when it claims IoT as a victory for Xeons, and obviously there is PART of the eventual total solution for which it is true).

    Centriq's supposed to be sampling H2 2017. I'm guessing we'll be getting a monthly update of various QC stories up till then (like the MS story last week) all designed to properly contextualize the ultimate release. Obviously in QC's dreams, the coming-out party has on-stage not just MS but also reps from Facebook, Baidu, Amazon, Google, WeChat... We'll see how many of them they can line-up.
  • Ryan Smith - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    Reminder: If you're calling out other posters, then what you're posting isn't acceptable here. Reply
  • Bullwinkle J Moose - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    calling out:
    To challenge the truthfulness or genuineness of: called the debater on a question of fact.

    I doubt that will stop the Trolls here from calling me out on verifiable facts

    They will continue posting unverifiable assumptions like the last posters, "I doubt" and "I think" comments that get my verifiable facts deleted
  • Ryan Smith - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    Bullwinkle, you were the one calling out people. This, and the general off-topic ranting, needs to stop. Please. Reply
  • Bullwinkle J Moose - Friday, March 17, 2017 - link

    Which Platform Specific rant was off topic ? Reply
  • zodiacfml - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    I think the reasoning is there will be less emphasis on the CPU part in the coming years as performance is increasingly good enough for a lot of people. Reply
  • BrokenCrayons - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    That might be the case, but a counterpoint to that is the value of CPU branding in the mobile space to begin with. The average person, after just purchasing a new phone, can probably brag about the screen size, the amount of storage, or the number of CPUs. I doubt they'd know enough about ARM processors to cite the SoC's brand origin. That means the target market for any branding probably is less about consumers and more about business customers. Their engineers understand the nuances of the chip they're including in their product so they'd likely be unimpressed or just apathetic to the branding.

    Okay...after rambling, I'm not really sure where I was going with this. I swear I had some kind of point to come to at the end, but its apparently gone.
  • Comdrpopnfresh - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    Slight of hand to detract from the huge lawsuit against them. Also serves to reframe the language about anti-competitive practices when selling what was formerly known as their 'processor.' Processor sounds atomic, and makes attacking their practices easier. To restructure the argument such that they were merely incentivizing adoption of a holistic platform helps them against the arguments. Reply
  • socalbigmike - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - link

    So, we are finally going acknowledge that Qualcomm is behind the HTC Pixel's camera system, as well as other ODM's, or are we going to keep playing the same BS game? :-/ Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now