|
2015-02-10
, 09:19
|
|
Posts: 1,789 |
Thanked: 1,699 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
|
#12
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kangal For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2015-02-10
, 09:42
|
Posts: 338 |
Thanked: 496 times |
Joined on Oct 2010
|
#13
|
- Intel's TurnKey
- Strong GPU
- Possibility to port Jolla Tablet OS to other Win8 Tablets
- Documentation (unlike RockChip, AMLogic, MediaTek)
- Less proprietary bits? (than Tegra chips)
All I know is, if it works... don't fix it.
Then again you never know, maybe it would've been better going with a Snapdragon 800 (or newer).
|
2015-02-10
, 10:06
|
|
Posts: 141 |
Thanked: 359 times |
Joined on Aug 2010
@ Italy
|
#14
|
Only the first point is relevant. AFAIK the whole tablet project was opportunistic - plans weren't long-standing, they just jumped on it when they realised tablet hardware in general was quite cheap and Intel were offering even small players some sweet, sweet subsidies.
|
2015-02-10
, 10:29
|
Posts: 285 |
Thanked: 1,900 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
|
#15
|
Only the first point is relevant. AFAIK the whole tablet project was opportunistic - plans weren't long-standing, they just jumped on it when they realised tablet hardware in general was quite cheap and Intel were offering even small players some sweet, sweet subsidies.
|
2015-02-10
, 12:03
|
Posts: 338 |
Thanked: 496 times |
Joined on Oct 2010
|
#16
|
Of course it's opportunistic, but it might also be long-standing. New Atom's are actually quite good chips and during this year Atom's will have integrated LTE-modems, so I wouldn't be surprised if second handset is loaded with one. AFAIK such move would also enable worldwide support and distribution as Intel's LTE modems are "universal". Add in subsidies and there should be another opportunity to get good HW and support for decent price, which should help Jolla in competition - as we already know, Jolla phone has been criticized for being expensive for that HW.
That is probably a big part of the reason. I do not think that is bad anyway.
Also, from a user/hacking point of view, it opens possibilities. The tablet is likely able to boot a desktop distribution from a pen drive/microsd in case of need.
|
2015-02-10
, 12:11
|
Posts: 752 |
Thanked: 2,808 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
@ Czech Republic
|
#17
|
|
2015-02-10
, 12:49
|
Community Council |
Posts: 4,920 |
Thanked: 12,867 times |
Joined on May 2012
@ Southerrn Finland
|
#18
|
|
2015-02-10
, 15:41
|
|
Posts: 2,355 |
Thanked: 5,249 times |
Joined on Jan 2009
@ Barcelona
|
#19
|
Actually, UEFI is a major problem for an open device. It was designed from the ground up to shut out third party software / OSes / ROMs. Indeed, if you can recall, in the run up to its launch on desktop, there was a great deal of worry that it would be impossible to install non MS operating systems on systems shipped with it preinstalled. This was the intention, but they backed down due to the storm that erupted. For a mobile platform that wants to be open or have an unlocked bootloader, they're going to need to disable a lot of the UEFI features (and certainly much of the security), from what I understand. It was originally meant to only work with OSes that provided a secure, approved key. This is why Jolla are "making no promises" on this front for the tablet.
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to javispedro For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2015-02-10
, 16:17
|
Posts: 735 |
Thanked: 1,054 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
|
#20
|
Intel lost $4.2b in the mobile / tablet space in 2014. That is how gross the market distortion is and how determined they are to (anti)compete. They even managed to register negative revenue in Q4.
Even if the Jolla Tablet is great (which I doubt at launch) and glossing over Intel's many other unsavoury aspects, for this reason there's no way I'll be buying one.