<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>iPad was to be Atom based</title>
		<description>Discuss iPad was to be Atom based</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24617-ipad-was-to-be-atom-based</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 21:34:09 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/24617/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>fteoath64 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24617-ipad-was-to-be-atom-based#comment-33386</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If the iPad had the Atom chip, it would have bombed in the market!. I am shocked that Jobs had such poor understanding of CPU technologies. Intel had nothing useful in the ultra-mobile space and struggling for sometime. Once Apple scales the A5 using MP15 core, they will realise the power in the portable market. No other architecture can touch it. Just get an ARM license Intel.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>fteoath64</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 28 Oct 2011 10:03:17 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24617-ipad-was-to-be-atom-based#comment-33386</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>dew111 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24617-ipad-was-to-be-atom-based#comment-33374</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Intel will do what Intel wants to do. Unfortunately, Intel wants to stuff x86 into everything. x86 cores will NEVER be as efficient as RISC cores, and power-saving is the name of the game in mobile devices. Even with a 2+ year advantage in process technology, Intel (or anyone else making x86) still can't beat ARM, MIPS and others for power/performance. It's really a shame; they could crush ARM in every market if they would let go of x86. Then again, they would also need good graphics to make winning SoCs. Faced with obvious deficiencies in their power/performance metrics, Intel just hums louder and cranks out more x86 chips.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>dew111</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 22:20:38 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24617-ipad-was-to-be-atom-based#comment-33374</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>The blue fox says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24617-ipad-was-to-be-atom-based#comment-33364</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It's better it was not atom based. cant see them getting the same battery life out of an atom system. I could also see people some how geting windows on it also.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>The blue fox</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 17:28:02 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/24617-ipad-was-to-be-atom-based#comment-33364</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
