patrick.net

B.A.C.A.H. says

Another word for Moore's Law is a race to the bottom. Kinda hard for all those fabless outfits to thrive and also share their margins with a foundry in a Moore's Law Cost Reduction Race to the Bottom. All those Cool and Hip (and FabLess) Outfits you're talking about will have to share their margins with their foundries. Intel and Samsung won't have to.

----------------------------------
Exactly.....

BACAH, I did like the pithy Jerry Sanders quote. Is it also fair to summarize this way: Until we diverge from silicon based computing solutions, Intel IS THE MAN?

Very interesting Seeking Alpha article on Intel: BUY BACKS DONE RIGHT...

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1068981-intel-s-big-buyback-will-roast-the-bears

....."Of course, with the PC "dying," and with Intel having "missed the boat" on mobile (which seems silly since the "boat" is always coming back every year or two depending on your contract with your carrier), shares of the chip giant are at a mind-boggling bargain. Intel bears will point to the share price's stagnation over the last 10 years while conveniently ignoring the fact that Intel's EPS has been very rapidly growing due to substantial increases in net income as well as a dramatic reduction of share count....."

......"Much of the time, stock buybacks by companies (especially tech companies) are not done particularly opportunistically. In fact, the majority of the time, investors are left scratching their heads wondering why the firm decided to spend their cash buying back stock at obscenely high levels.

Intel is slightly different. The firm is very opportunistic about its purchases and is shameless about letting Wall Street know when it believes that shares are substantially undervalued by borrowing money to buy back shares. The firm first did this in September of last year, issuing $5B worth of non-convertible bonds for use in buybacks. This strategy made perfect sense: the share price was at ridiculously low levels, borrowing costs at even more mindblowingly low levels, so it was a no brainer for a successful company that is confident about its own future.

1. intel has a 4.38% dividend yield today.

2. their dividend is growing quite nicely; growing 10% to 20+% per year every year since 2007. even during the recession intel increased their dividend which is impressive.

if you are a patient investor, and can wait, you should receive an increasing dividend just to hold onto intel shares (at roughly 4% yield/year).
if you can squeeze out a 2%-4% capital gain/year over the next few years i'd consider intel a fairly decent investment (6%-8% total return). you also have more upside over this amount if you believe this latest pullback is oversold which i think it may be.

the price is fairly range bound since 2004 - between $12/share to $28/share with the price at $20/share today; right in the middle.

$12/share was at the recession low, that's probably a hard floor and won't go below it unless something catastrophic happens.

$28/share was this march and it pulled back nicely to $20/share today; about a 29% drop in 9 months. this large, fast drop doesn't happen very often and typically price will bounce (for a quality company) which means it may be a buy opportunity.
in these cases, you hold it for less than a year or two.

you still need to check fundamentals; especially earnings and cash since you want to have a good amount of confidence the dividend will continue to be paid out.

long term, i still hate the way the price moves.

Hysteresis says

you still need to check fundamentals;

Here are some fundamentals:B.A.C.A.H. says

Moore's Law has always been what it always was, about Cost Reduction and Nothing Else

(Cost Reduction has not been just about Technology Innovation. It's also been about Financial Innovation like foisting off some of your capital costs {"CapEx" for Cool Hipsters like our AMEX black friend} onto taxpayers in municipalities like Hsinchu or Rio Rancho or the State of New York).

Another word for Moore's Law is a "race", - a race to the bottom. Kinda hard for all those fabless outfits to thrive and also share their margins with a foundry in a Moore's Law Cost Reduction Race to the Bottom.

Kevin, any comments on this thread?

Bump. Kevin, any comments?

Still waiting for the post kicking the can down the road 2 months deal bump to dissipate.

I found this article fascinating...and the comments just as important... I love Seeking Alpha. Check it out...

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1100401-intel-the-chess-game-in-mobile-semiconductors

Real men have empty fabs?
I heard Intel will be giving a Merriefield chip SoC to the first 100 million customers. Sigh... AB, thanks for posting.

Intel still doesn't have a compelling mobile strategy. They're now lying about power efficiency in order to convince people that they're making progress. comparing their announcements at ces to the three leading mobile chip vendors is striking.

PC sales are falling off a cliff, and roughly zero buyers own Intel powered mobile devices. Qualcomm alone is selling more SoCs than Intel is selling CPUs.

Intel may yet pull their asses from the fire, but my bet is that it will come from buying another chip vendor (say, nvidia) or going back to being an ARM licensee.

The ship has sailed on compatibility. Native code is still critical on smart phones and tablets, and cross compilers just aren't cutting it. X86 has no future, and I suspect even Intel believes that at this point.

Kevin,

- How is Intel lying about power efficiency? got a link?
- PC Sales are falling off a cliff? What #, in your mind is a 'cliff'? 20, 30, 50%

- The ship has sailed on compatibility? You can't be serious.
------------------------------------

......"Intel Can't Fight ARM - The Biggest Myth On Wall Street

One of the biggest myths on Wall Street, perpetuated primarily by those who are not particularly familiar with the technology behind the headlines, is that Intel - a company whose quarterly dividend payments are greater than ARM's projected sales for the year - cannot design a similar/better processor core than ARM. The argument then extends beyond that to state that Intel can't design a world-class system on chip.

Look, let's be perfectly honest here. Intel invented the micro-processor, and has been writing the book on power-efficient, high performance CPU architectures for decades. The only reason Intel's products haven't absolutely decimated any of its competition's (powered by ARM cores or custom cores) is that Intel hadn't - until now - really targeted their designs at low power. Does anybody seriously think that Apple (AAPL), which was able to do a better-than-ARM's-own-design core in its first try, has stronger silicon design talent and resources than Intel?

Intel, unlike ARM and its licensees, is a company focused on actually earning money and not touting PR design wins for much lower ASP chips in a commodity smartphone. Intel, instead, plowed its resources into high-end processors with high ASPs that nobody else can match. Despite the hype around ARM, it is noteworthy that Intel's net income in 2011 of $12.5B is more than 12x ARM's entire projected revenue for FY2012 of ~$900M.

----------------------------------------------------

Here's a good article, again by Ashraf over at SA... I think it will refute many or all of your arguments against Intel...

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1104561-intel-busting-the-mobile-margin-myth

full disclosure.. LOOOOOONG INTC....

the reason why you didn't see intel SOCs in Mobil is because they didn't have a 4LTEchip. Now they do. They are already assaulting the foreign markets withhones that don't need or even have a 4G network. 4LTE SOC chips will be showing up before 2014....

AverageBear says

- How is Intel lying about power efficiency? got a link?

http://ces.cnet.com/8301-34435_1-57563024/intel-responds-to-cooked-power-efficiency-claims/

AverageBear says

- PC Sales are falling off a cliff? What #, in your mind is a 'cliff'? 20, 30, 50%

Sales are declining year over year by 6% and rising. Profits for PCs are down 20%. This is despite the launch of a brand new version of windows. The PC is dead dead dead.

AverageBear says

The ship has sailed on compatibility? You can't be serious.

Do you even know what I'm talking about?

Buy an android phone running Intel chips. Load up Google play. Try to find any of the popular games that people play. Nothing is compatible and no developer will waste their time building for it.

Intel having a ton of money means fuck all. It didn't stop IBM from having the PC business pulled out from underneath them. It didn't stop Microsoft from losing the mobile market. It didn't stop Motorola from losing the handset market.

Intel religiously believes in x86. Until they adopt ARM, or invent an entirely new architecture, they will continue to fail in mobile. They are making the same dumb decisions as Microsoft, trying to use their market power and irrelevant advantages in another market.

They're trying to sell mobile chips in emerging markets because nobody will buy them anywhere else. Nobody is buying them in the emerging markets either.

Once Intel replaces otellini with fresh blood they might come to their senses. ARM is in dire need of real competition, but it needs competition built for the 21st century.

AverageBear says

the reason why you didn't see intel SOCs in Mobil is because they didn't have a 4LTEchip. Now they do. They are already assaulting the foreign markets withhones that don't need or even have a 4G network. 4LTE SOC chips will be showing up before 2014....

LTE still represents less than 10% of handset sales. Last year it was less than 1%. It has never been a relevant advantage, since it wasn't until last July that ANY vendor had a soc that supported it. Nvidia and Samsung had to use a separate Qualcomm chip, which is why the power usage was shit.

Nobody wants Intel chips in their phones because Intel still wants $50 per chip for something that delivers performance per watt similar to three year old socs, doesn't support most games, and generally performs badly on operating systems that people actually want on their phones.

Kevin says

Sales are declining year over year by 6% and rising.

from 35.5 B to 43.6 B to 53.9 B is not exactly declining and not - 6% by far.

http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/financials/financials.asp?ticker=INTC

AverageBear says

One of the biggest myths on Wall Street, perpetuated primarily by those who are not particularly familiar with the technology behind the headlines, is that Intel - a company whose quarterly dividend payments are greater than ARM's projected sales for the year - cannot design a similar/better processor core than ARM. The argument then extends beyond that to state that Intel can't design a world-class system on chip.

yes.. they myth was busted by mid 90s since Intel already incorporated RISC into their tech. Had they not .. ARM/PPC and others would already been a success story..
they had some promise ...but RISC failed.

thomaswong.1986 says

Kevin says

Sales are declining year over year by 6% and rising.

from 35.5 B to 43.6 B to 53.9 B is not exactly declining and not - 6% by far.

http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/financials/financials.asp?ticker=INTC

PC sales, not Intel sales.

Closed at 22.68 After Hours : 21.54 1.14 (5.03%) 7:12PM EST

IMO, the only reason it's much above 20 is because the market high. IMO, the recent borrowing money to do a stock buyback is not bullish and I lost interest after that.

As a shareholder, I rather not have a company have to pump 10B in Capex and more every year. Not a great business if your success relies on that much perpectual/non ending investment.
The point some of the more bullish Intel articles claim is that Intel can make a go of it as a foundry business along with manufacturing their own chips. Someone HAS to make CapEx expenditures on behalf of a company like Qualcomm (and other fabless outfits). He who gets to the next gen process technology first can charge a premium for access to their foundry. If Qualcomm is not willing to pay, then some one will get to be king of the (lower power) mountain.

they had some promise ...but RISC failed.
Until they found a market where less is more... and thrived.

"Somebody" is already doing the foundry work. First and foremost, samsung (a bigger company than either intel or qualcomm by far), but also TSMC, UMC, and Globalfoundries.

Samsung makes their own chips, as well as most of apple's (though apple is moving to the other choices since samsung is their biggest competitor now).

5 years ago intel was 3 years ahead of all of these vendors in terms of time to bring up new processes. Now they're less than 6 months ahead on 14nm, and will more likely than not actually go into production at about the same time.

Given that nobody really knows where to go beyond 14nm, foundry advantages aren't particularly relevant for much longer. They won't be able to make processors faster just by cramming more transistors onto the same silicon. Architectural improvements will be critical over the next few years until new ways of doing computation (or materials breakthroughs) are discovered.

Neither samsung nor apple is interested in intel's chips. That's 80% of the smartphone market and 95% of the tablet market. If intel wants to sell mobile chips, they either need to work with 2nd and 3rd tier vendors (who can't compete with apple and samsung), work with a new vendor who can establish themselves as something unique and try to win portions of the market, or build their own devices.

I can see a few situations where intel comes out OK from all of this, but they aren't pursuing any of them. Their current strategy is going to end with them being a provider of niche server chips. While this isn't a bad business, if it's their only business then they will be a substantially smaller company than they are today.

Kevin says

I can see a few situations where intel comes out OK from all of this, but they aren't pursuing any of them. Their current strategy is going to end with them being a provider of niche server chips. While this isn't a bad business, if it's their only business then they will be a substantially smaller company than they are today.

I agree, but I think they can also potentially do well in their SSD market (at some point).

21.27 Down 1.41(6.22%) 9:41AM EST - Nasdaq Real Time Price

Not sure what potential effect on the dividend this might have long term though.

Ssds , maybe. Competition is tough and Intel isn't the market leader.

AMD down today in sympathy:
2.51 Down 0.23(8.58%) 2:25PM EST - Nasdaq Real Time Price

Now they're less than 6 months ahead on 14nm, and will more likely than not actually go into production at about the same time.
You're the first person I've heard say that. The 'value investors' like Intel for their lead in process technology (getting to market sooner and having advantages like trigate transistors). If the other three main players are really that close, Intel is in trouble.
Apple is the wildcard. Continuing with Samsung is untenable, so whoever grabs their business gets a big win.
Nokia (or a third tier mobile player) going Wintel is the long shot that could change market dynamics. Desktop in your pocket could be compelling for the business segment. But for that to happen Wintel has to cannibalize the desktop PC market. And as Clayton Christensen points out in The Innovator's Dilemma, that's a very hard thing for an established player to do. Much easier for ARM SoC's to come in on a niche market (phone/tablet), grow the niche (as they've already done), and start eating everyone elses lunch.

Nobody wants windows phones so that would be an awful strategy.

There is no situation where x86 wins. Longer term, there's probably no future for independent chip makers. Its inevitable that whoever survives the mobile war will do their own silicon (maybe outsourcing fabrication like apple does)

Longer term, there's probably no future for independent chip makers.
I was curious what you thought about that. I didn't realize how ugly it was out there until TI dumped the OMAP processors. BTW, we're using a TI Sitara chip in one of our designs.

Nobody wants windows phones so that would be an awful strategy.
Nobody wants a phone the size of small paperback either. Oh wait, phablets! I once worked for a company that got run over by Redmond, so I never count them out.

Kevin says

Intel religiously believes in x86. Until they adopt ARM, or invent an
entirely new architecture, they will continue to fail in mobile. They are making
the same dumb decisions as Microsoft, trying to use their market power and
irrelevant advantages in another market.

x86 is dead or dying? ha. Did you think it was dying when the DX2 66 came out in the late 80's/early 90s? Because that's where I think the mobil market is right now, in terms of being in a 'mature' market. (At least your words seem to convey that). Everyone's talking like the mobile market is already mature, and INTC is locked out forever, which to me is a VERY short-sighted view....INTC has only gotten interested in mobile because it was first going for the high margin server/PC market, ie the 'low lying fruit' the last 5 years. Now that they dominated that market, they are moving along to mobile. Did they underestimate the recent explosive growth of mobile; probably. But I think they will have the best chip when the slowing PC sales transition to the growing hybrid/mobile tablet market, when Corporate consumers will start replacing desktops/laptops w/ these devices. And ALL or MOST of these devices will have an Intel chip in them. I predict spreadsheets/powerpoint/database work/etc will not be done on an iPad in the corporate environment. INTC has always been a cyclical company. Slow and lumbering to a point? yes.... I think many 'ra-ra' ARM fans underestimate the corporate consumer market, with the recent success of Apple/tablets. They love to bash Wintel and all things MS. Personally I'm indifferent about MS, but as people expect more and more computing power out of their tablet form factors (for business or pleausure), the 'good enough' ARM offerings will start to show their flaws. Again, the mobile market is NOT mature or all sewn up in the least. I think we are at 'halftime' or earlier in the mobile game. Meanwhile, I'll continue to receive INTC's growing dividends every quarter, and buy on the dips.

---------------------------------------

Kevin says

They're trying to sell mobile chips in emerging markets because nobody will
buy them anywhere else. Nobody is buying them in the emerging markets
either.

I think INTC is doing much better in foreign mobile markets than your "trying to sell" statement implies. They are holding off from US entry because they know the HW vendors won't even sniff at INTC's offering till they get a mobile LTE chip, which is happening mid-late 2013. They are biding their time on US entry for a reason.

AverageBear says

x86 is dead or dying? ha. Did you think it was dying when the DX2 66 came out in the late 80's/early 90s? Because that's where I think the mobil market is right now, in terms of being in a 'mature' market.

There are now more than twice as many ARM-based devices being sold every day than x86 devices. More people buy a smartphone every year than buy a PC.

Yes, it's a very mature market.

AverageBear says

NTC has only gotten interested in mobile because it was first going for the high margin server/PC market, ie the 'low lying fruit' the last 5 years.

FIVE years? Try 20. And it was only "high margin" for intel itself -- every other participant in the hardware ecosystem was getting the shaft. That's why nobody wants anything to do with intel any more.

AverageBear says

But I think they will have the best chip when the slowing PC sales transition to the growing hybrid/mobile tablet market, when Corporate consumers will start replacing desktops/laptops w/ these devices.

Nobody wants these devices and nobody cares.

People who want tablets are buying tablets. The "hybrid" device is what Steve Ballmer tells himself that people want so that he can sleep at night.

AverageBear says

And ALL or MOST of these devices will have an Intel chip in them. I predict spreadsheets/powerpoint/database work/etc will not be done on an iPad in the corporate environment.

They already are. When was the last time you set foot inside of a "corporate environment"?

AverageBear says

I think many 'ra-ra' ARM fans underestimate the corporate consumer market, with the recent success of Apple/tablets.

It isn't just apple. Apple isn't even the market leader. The corporate trend is moving towards a model where people just use their own equipment, now that the data is all stored online anyway and remote management policies can be set up to minimize the risk of data leaks.

AverageBear says

Personally I'm indifferent about MS, but as people expect more and more computing power out of their tablet form factors (for business or pleausure), the 'good enough' ARM offerings will start to show their flaws.

The only people who need more power from these devices are creative professionals who need to run photoshop or an IDE. It's a niche market.

AverageBear says

Again, the mobile market is NOT mature or all sewn up in the least. I think we are at 'halftime' or earlier in the mobile game.

Keep telling yourself that. Meanwhile, the mobile market is saturated with even poor kids in sub-saharan Africa owning smartphones. Growth is slowing (but it's still growing, unlike the PC market), and people love the devices.

AverageBear says

I think INTC is doing much better in foreign mobile markets than your "trying to sell" statement implies.

Oh, are they secretly keeping their sales in "foreign mobile markets" off the books then? Because as of right this moment, they don't register any meaningful number of sales. There were more mobile devices running MIPS based chips sold last year than intel!

AverageBear says

They are holding off from US entry because they know the HW vendors won't even sniff at INTC's offering till they get a mobile LTE chip, which is happening mid-late 2013.

Again, you don't seem to understand LTE.

Quick, name more than one vendor that has an LTE chip ready for the US market.

TRICK QUESTION! THERE ISN'T ONE!

Everybody uses qualcomm. Samsung and NVIDIA will finally debut LTE chips in their next generation chips that they showed off at CES.

Intel could also use Qualcomm. I'll give you a dollar if you can correctly state why it is that Intel won't go down this route.

And, of course, 90% of smartphones that people actually want to buy are Samsung Android phones and iPhones. NEITHER of these companies has any interest in intel chips. The only company that has enough market share to matter that intel could persue is HTC, and HTC has publicly stated that they aren't interested in intel chips.

Motorola, a 3rd-tier vendor at best, is the only vendor that is even talking about intel chips in its products.

AverageBear says

They are biding their time on US entry for a reason.

The reason is that nobody wants their hardware.

AverageBear says

Meanwhile, I'll continue to receive INTC's growing dividends every quarter, and buy on the dips.

What would be a good entry point here? I'm thinking of buying on the post earnings dip that started last Friday.

zzyzzx says

What would be a good entry point here? I'm thinking of buying on the post
earnings dip that started last Friday.

-------------------------------
I last bought INTC at $20. I have some $$ to deploy within my 401K, but I'm holding off, as I don't want to be overweight in INTC.... However, if it gets down to $20 again, I'll buy some more. Maybe it's a psychological #, but at the current annual dividend, $20 a share comes out to a 4.5% dividend. To me, this is a good yield for a blue-chip tech that's a solid free-cash-flow (FCF) machine....

Kevin says

FIVE years? Try 20. And it was only "high margin" for intel itself -- every
other participant in the hardware ecosystem was getting the shaft. That's why
nobody wants anything to do with intel any more.

----------------------------------
Who are 'they'? The ones that are out of business? Or the ones who have less than 5% of the server chip market, or the ones that have less than 5-10% of the PC chip market?

Kevin says

There are now more than twice as many ARM-based devices being sold every day
than x86 devices. More people buy a smartphone every year than buy a PC.

Yes, it's a very mature market.

-------------------------------------------------
So what's going to happen when either the corporate entity 'they' work for, or 'they' themselves realize that it would be nice to do both work and non-work (surfing/playing/buying/video watching) on a tablet? Will they be going for their iPad/Surface-RT/Android tablet? no, they will be replacing their existing old laptop/desktop/tablet w/ an intel powered touch-screen tablet to run MS Office/SQL/web development tools/Acct/engineering apps. Those tablets will go to the kiddies as toys.....This is why x86 won't die.

AverageBear says

Again, you don't seem to understand LTE.

Quick, name more than one vendor that has an LTE chip ready for the US
market.

TRICK QUESTION! THERE ISN'T ONE!

Everybody uses qualcomm. Samsung and NVIDIA will finally debut LTE chips in
their next generation chips that they showed off at CES.

------------------------------------------------------
From what I'm reading, Intel will have an SoC chip w/ an LTE modem by the end of 2013. QCOM have advantages by being 'first mover'? Obviously. Will they be the only dominant modem/LTE provider after 2013? no. Will QCOM have some advantages (having rolled out then 2nd gen/3rd gen LTE to INTC's first stab at LTE? Of course, but not for long....

"Everyone uses Qualcomm"... For now.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1071831-how-intel-can-get-back-into-the-apple-iphone

......"Besides lamenting that I would likely not be qualified for the jobs there, I realized that Intel is dead-serious about becoming a significant competitor to Qualcomm in the baseband/modem space. Should Intel truly succeed here, then it has a shot at winning back the spot in the iPhone. Further, with a leading modem solution, it would be able to sell both an apps processor in addition to a world-class modem to phone vendors. This will have a significantly positive effect on revenues and is a great way to leverage the firm's enormous fabrication capacity."

I see you haven't answered any of the questions

There is zero chance of apple going back yo using other peoples processors. Its a gigantic advantage over everyone else.

Its more likely that they'll move to their own chips on the desktop first

http://www.cclonline.com/article/1060/News/CPUs/Intel-Starts-Production-of-Haswell/

Looking forward to getting a new laptop this summer, based on the Haswell generation CPU. My current laptop is 4+ years old, although it still works OK.

SFace says

I don't know what you have been reading but Apple is fully comitted to ARM.
Their own designers are all in on ARMH Samsung as a manufacturer of ARM based
prodecesor is on that track as well.

------------------------
As you know, Apple has been known to beat the shit out its suppliers, and would sell it's own proverbial Grand-MaMa to ensure production runs smoothly at the best price. Seeing Apple go to Intel for its LTE modems is not out of the question. It may take a while, but not out of the question. The article I referenced, only had to do w/ Intel 'possibly' supplying w/ modem chips only. I fully understand that Apple is committed to ARM architecture for it's iphone/iPad CPUs. However, as we all know, Apple relies on Intel for its (gasp!) CPU chips for its MacBooks....I don't see Apple switching architectures on its macBooks. I dunno. Do you have a link saying otherwise? Meanwhile, lotsa Intel chips in MacBooks Wiki link below...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacBook

It will be interesting to see if ARM can make a chip powerful enough to meet the onslaught of low power chips already coming out of Intel's foundries. On one side you have Mac's OS running on Intel chips, and on the other side you have the iphone/iPads running on ARM. WHEN (not if) Apple decides to wake up and make it's OS w/ touch-screen capability, it is possible that ARM or Intel will be chosen. Completlely negating Intel chances from winning this race? It's too early to call. I sure don't have a crystal ball, but I like Intel's chances.

SFace says

Not a fan of the buybacks and dividends. This is a time to build a warchest of
cash to fight off competitors yet they are in the weakest balance sheet position
in memory

-----------------------
I see your point, but I think Intel knows it needs to hurry up and get into mobile asap. I don't deny they kinda fell asleep in reacting to the tablet form factor, but they are awake now. I'd rather see them commit huge amounts of cash towards Tick-Toc, than sit on a pile of cash. One question comes to mind. With Apple w/ it warchest, you would think it would spend some of that money and get its OS w/ the touch screen feature. Microsoft beat them to market on this. Or maybe they were happy w/ just the touch screens for iPads/phones only, and didn't see a need? One would think w/ that warchest, Apple would go on the offensive, and get its touchscreen feature on it's OS, and start winning in the corporate world (ie, Microsoft's turf)....

Kevin says

I see you haven't answered any of the questions

There is zero chance of apple going back yo using other peoples processors.
Its a gigantic advantage over everyone else.

------------------------------------
I got many answers... Like this one. Zero chance of Apple going back to 'other's peoples processors'? Sooo, who's chip is in the MacBooks? hmm?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacBook

Lotsa Intel mentioned in that link....

You really don't know what's going on, do you?

Apple already has a touch screen OS. Its called iOS and it is the second most popular operating system on the market (windows is now a distant third).

The corporate market has already been infiltrated by apple. Its called the iPad.

The traditional PC is becoming a niche market, and apple doesn't care about it anymore.