Intel Announces Quark, Its Smallest Silicon Yet
Quark is teeny and uses a fraction of the power that Atom consumes.
Though the Internet might be absorbed in all things Apple, there's plenty of other stuff going on in the tech industry. Chief among them is IDF, but Intel isn't letting a little thing like an Apple event get in the way of its developer conference or any planned announcements. During his IDF keynote, Intel's CEO revealed its smallest silicon yet, Quark.
Quark is Intel's newest range of processors and it's aimed at wearable tech. The Quark chips use one tenth of the power of Intel's Atom and measure one fifth of Atom's size. The low-power chips come as the market for smartwatches and devices like Google Glass is poised to explode.
Other than the fact that Quark will target wearable devices, CEO Brian Krzanich didn't give much else away. We'll keep you posted on all things Quark.
Follow Jane McEntegart @JaneMcEntegart. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

:-)
But a ferengi fits quite nice to this news...
What has happened to the resilience and fortitude of the people in our society when something that weighs mere ounces and rests comfortably on the palm of your hand and fits in most pockets is described as some "big ass" device that one must "lug" around?
"This thing has SOFTWARE?"
I'm sorry, but my phone will never replace my watch. It takes two seconds for me to look at my watch and know the time, date, and day. To use my phone for that exact same purpose I'd need to stand up (I'm 6'5" so most chairs put my legs at a sharp angle, making getting into my pocket difficult), reach into my pocket and pull out my phone, press the wake button, and THEN find out the time, date, and day.
Why would I ever forgo a watch to replace it with a more cumbersome method; one I don't always have with me and which isn't always charged? If I need the time, I need it, but my phone isn't always there or isn't always available.
So yeah, my phone will never replace my watch. I might get a new watch, but it definitely won't be smart watch; not until I get 2 year battery life from it.
I'm sorry, but my phone will never replace my watch. It takes two seconds for me to look at my watch and know the time, date, and day. To use my phone for that exact same purpose I'd need to stand up (I'm 6'5" so most chairs put my legs at a sharp angle, making getting into my pocket difficult), reach into my pocket and pull out my phone, press the wake button, and THEN find out the time, date, and day.
Why would I ever forgo a watch to replace it with a more cumbersome method; one I don't always have with me and which isn't always charged? If I need the time, I need it, but my phone isn't always there or isn't always available.
So yeah, my phone will never replace my watch. I might get a new watch, but it definitely won't be smart watch; not until I get 2 year battery life from it.
I don't know about you, but I am surrounded by clocks. There is one on the computer at all times, which is where I spend the vast bulk of the day. Then there is one in the living room where I spend what little down time I get. Then there is one in the car, in the basement, on the thermostat in the hall, and for that rare moment that I happen to be in a place without a clock then I can spend the effort to dig my phone out of my pocket...
But the biggest thing about having a smart phone are alarms and calendars. If there is some place important I need to be then it is added to my calendar with a reminder that gives me plenty of time to put away what I am doing and travel to where I need to go. The rest of the time I simply don't need to worry about time anymore, and that is quite liberating.
"This message is to inform you that I am soiled
-sincerely, your pants"
Smart clothes? No thanks.
This tech would be much better used for smart home applications. Many more devices could be sold to a much wider audience, with a much more justifiable price while keeping profits relatively high.
Quote:
"This message is to inform you that I am soiled
-sincerely, your pants"
Smart clothes? No thanks.
This tech would be much better used for smart home applications. Many more devices could be sold to a much wider audience, with a much more justifiable price while keeping profits relatively high.
----------
I think it might be useful for smart clothes like disposable baby diapers that do something when the kid drops a load just so you don't need to check all the time.