Edge AI market is set to substantially increase.
...said the same people who over-predicted demand for "AI PCs".
I think it's more a matter of "build it and they will come", where "they" is the software developers. Once
most PCs have some AI capability, more apps will start to take advantage of it. Not the reverse, which MS seems to be hoping for.
Offloading some compute load onto AI PCs would save it money.
The tradeoff is the size of the models and not everybody has the connectivity or data plans needed to download them, at least not like "whenever".
AI needs to come to the OS level before people are motivated to go buy new PCs.
Do not want.
AI is already a mass market product. Case in point: ChatGPT.
But it doesn't run locally. Make it run locally, without big tradeoffs, and with significant benefits to the user vs. using the cloud service, and then we'll talk.
Windows will have to offer more than a chatbot. Off the cuff, image generation is an easy pick. There may be others. AI tutor for [insert need here], tax-prep guide, etc.
These are already things people can do in the cloud and not enough people spend enough time doing to justify a new PC.
It's overpriced because the value proposition isn't there.
I suspect Qualcomm believes the main value proposition is their brand name. Second to that: battery life and 5G connectivity. In the US, few people rely on 5G for data and the battery life wasn't that much greater than their peers.
I think something in Qualcomm's culture won't allow them ever to try capturing a market simply by making a cheaper alternative. They seem to have the mindset of a premium brand, like Hermès or Ferrari, because their actions tend to look like preventing brand erosion at all costs.
Remember what you yourself said, when you think you are smarter than the industry, think again.
That was in regards to the the economics, performance, and efficiency of different lithography and silicon engineering approaches. These are quantifiable and analyzed by many experts and architects.
What we're talking about, here, is more along the lines of some marketing dweeb's "gut feel", as evidenced by how badly and frequently they've gotten it wrong. If it were such a clear-cut numerical case as the lithography and silicon engineering questions, then they might've had the odd misstep or execution error, but their strategy would not be so easily called into question.
I'll thank you not to take further statements of mine out of context.
For a business, competing on price is the absolute last resort,
I know they don't
like to compete on price, but there are many successful examples where it's worked. Not least of all, the x86 PC, itself - the very thing they're trying to replace! It displaced far better computing solutions, some of which were already entrenched in businesses, by commodifying and undercutting everything else, on price. Then, successfully moved up the value chain, until a point about a decade ago where x86 held complete dominance over the server and cloud markets.
So, it's definitely possible to start with cheaper solution and work upwards. The nice thing about this strategy is that you build your installed base quickly, and that attracts software developers. That can address not only the questionable value proposition of AI, but also whether there are enough games & other apps that run natively.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram