Is Intel a "gorilla" or a "king" in the processor chip business?
I think the situation with Intel is that during certain periods, such as 1982-1995, their technology was sufficiently more advanced than the competition so that they held a monopoly and were the "gorilla". Also during this period PC software was becoming larger and more complex and required the fastest processors, which were made by Intel.
But in the current period, PC software demands have not been accelerating as quickly, and we no longer require the fastest Intel processors to run our applications. Processor chips from AMD and National/Cyrix are almost as powerful, and are less expensive than the Intels, so many end-users and computer makers are using non-Intel processors, or using medium-speed Intels.
The "switching costs" for a computer maker to switch from an Intel processor to non-Intel can be very low.
So, maybe Intel is now a "king". They still have about 80% of the processor chip market, but must now keep prices low to prevent customers from switching to AMD and Cyrix/National.
Personally, my first PC had an Intel chip, but my last three PCs have had processors from Harris, AMD, and Cyrix.
Many people now require a faster Internet connection to get their work (or recreation) done, rather than a faster processor chip.
GLTUA |
