What happened to the Nano?

maxius said:
i will tell what happened but you will never believe me INTEL is what happened and their anti competitive practices
Click to expand...

Well I'm willing to believe that many customers bought Intel instead of VIA by the name alone, so the mere fact that Atom is available probably cut into Nano sales.
But anti-competitive practices? Doubtful.
In fact, I just saw that Samsung released a new tablet PC based on the Nano, the other day.
 
Scali2 said:
Well I'm willing to believe that many customers bought Intel instead of VIA by the name alone, so the mere fact that Atom is available probably cut into Nano sales.
But anti-competitive practices? Doubtful.
In fact, I just saw that Samsung released a new tablet PC based on the Nano, the other day.
Click to expand...

As I posted in a thread a while ago :p
 
The nano was a pretty typical launch for Via. Here's how they usually go:

1. Via introduces a really cool, intriguing product that has some very compelling features. For example, consider how thoroughly the nano outperforms the atom.
2. They "launch" the product and get a few samples out so that reviewers can write about it.
3. No one ever sees or hears about the product ever again and everyone forgets it ever existed.

I don't feel bad for Via, they've done this countless times. They launch products that they aren't actually able to provide.
 
It's available, though. Check LogicSupply. It's just that while it performs OK for what it is, it's not really as power efficient as it sounded at first, and the chipsets available for it are complete crap.
 
Elledan said:
At which point we should start looking at the power usage of other components, like the chipset :)

*giggles at Intel combining the Atom's 4 Watt TDP with a 30+ Watt chipset*
Click to expand...

first thing on my mind when I saw all these reviews! "nano draws 30W, the atom draws less than 10! how can you compare the two!?". Because crappy 3 year old G945 pulls 6x the power the atom does, and via's north bridge is at least on the same order of magnitude as the processor itself.
 
Eva_Unit_0 said:
The nano was a pretty typical launch for Via. Here's how they usually go:

1. Via introduces a really cool, intriguing product that has some very compelling features. For example, consider how thoroughly the nano outperforms the atom.
2. They "launch" the product and get a few samples out so that reviewers can write about it.
3. No one ever sees or hears about the product ever again and everyone forgets it ever existed.

I don't feel bad for Via, they've done this countless times. They launch products that they aren't actually able to provide.
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, this is the exact opposite of what S3 (which VIA owns) does. They release decent products without telling anyone.
 
bholstege said:
Funnily enough, this is the exact opposite of what S3 (which VIA owns) does. They release decent products without telling anyone.
Click to expand...

Umm name one decent product they have... Sure they may be stable, but not one of them has reasonable performance for anything but desktop - internet use.
 
Lazn_Work said:
Umm name one decent product they have... Sure they may be stable, but not one of them has reasonable performance for anything but desktop - internet use.
Click to expand...

Intel has become marketleader in graphics by doing exactly that :)
In fact, less than that, because their drivers weren't always that stable or compatible (not sure if the S3 ones are, though).
 
Lazn_Work said:
Umm name one decent product they have... Sure they may be stable, but not one of them has reasonable performance for anything but desktop - internet use.
Click to expand...

The 530 is great for HTPC, and has tolerable performance.
 
That certainly would be interesting. Just hope they don't release it by the time it is obsolete.
 
Scali2 said:
But anti-competitive practices? Doubtful.
Click to expand...

Yes, Intel would never do ANYTHING to stifle competition! In fact, I hear tell that they actually state publically (in their own print ads no less! You don't see these because you surf the internet too much and don't pay attention to the more influential print publications.) that their graphics offerings are far inferior to that of nvidia and actively promote sales thereof. In a recent press conference they announced that their attempt to ban Nvidia from producing i7 chipsets was actually an effort to encourage Nvidia to strike out on its own and create an alternative platform to their own x86 platform.

Intel spokesman Joe Bogart said that, "We here at Intel have come to the conclusion that the conroe architecture just made us too much money and had the unfortunate side effect of garnering for us a near monopoly over the home desktop market. After discussion with some top stock holders, who were irate over their high profit margins, we've decided it would be best to significantly reduce our marketshare."
Click to expand...

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20090220comp.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top