|
|
|
|
Portelligent STAReports |
A primary purpose of Portelligent's STAReports is to analyze key trends in the consumer
electronic product domains that Portelligent covers. |
These reports derive from in-depth analysis of the data in Portelligent's Product
Profile Database, providing a rigorous, quantitative tool for examining the evolution
of both key system components (for example, memory in cellular handsets), or, the
end products themselves (for example, Blackberry-like "e-mail machines"). |
|
Portelligent Key Metrics
Reports |
|
A primary purpose of Portelligent's product teardown analyses is to compile a set
of metrics that support product profiling and systematic comparison, as well as
identification of trends over time.
Whereas Portelligent product teardown reports
treat individual products, the Key Metrics Report draws data from our Product Profile
Database to facilitate comparisons among products, between handset makers, and at
different points in time, as well as to support analysis and comparison of system
complexity, semiconductor and component content, and design "fingerprint".
Portelligent Key Metrics Reports are available to customers whose channel license
cover the Cellular Phones, Chipography or Digital Imaging & Cameras Channels.
Click on links to the Key Metrics Reports above or below.
|
Combined Cell Phones & Chipography
Chipography
Cell Phones
Digital Cameras Imaging
|
Trends in Cell Phone Displays |
|
Introduction
|
Walk into a cell phone store, grab a phone, and turn it on. Chances are your first
impression of the phone will be based on the quality of the display. With many retail
purchases decided from the first impression, the display choice made by a cell phone
manufacturer can have a significant impact on the success of a particular model.
The initial success of the iPhone from Apple with a high-resolution, 3.5” diagonal
display has clearly made a statement about the importance of the display in a cell
phone. However, with all design selections, trade-offs occur. The design choice
to exclude a high-speed cellular data connection (e.g. W-CDMA or HSDPA) on the iPhone
was likely influenced by the cost of the large, high-quality display.
At the other end of the spectrum, where consumers can’t afford or don’t want a $600
multi-media phone, a significant market exists for cell phones that are used solely
as communication-only devices that don’t require a display that covers nearly all
of the surface area of the phone. These “voice-only” phones, where the display merely
shows number called or received and contact information, are typically purchased
on price first and other factors such as the phone manufacturer and display quality
second. With such a divergence in use models and market segments, it is no surprise
that the cell phone display industry has responded to the demands of phone manufacturers
with a variety of technologies, sizes, and resolutions.
|
|
Report Description
|
This report, based on Portelligent product teardowns, will show how the trends in
cell phone displays have evolved over the last four years. The report will answer
such critical questions as:
1. What percent of a cell phone bill-of-material is dedicated to the display and
has the percent changed over time?
2. What type of display technologies are used in the various segments of the cell
phone market and have the types changed over time?
3. How does the size and resolution of the displays vary by handset segment and
are they increasing or decreasing over time?
4. What are recent announcements regarding cell phone display technology and what
impact will they have on cell phones in the future?
|
|
Content
|
Table of Contents
Tables
Figures
1. Executive Summary
2. Portelligent IC BOM Segmentation Model
3. Definition of Terms
4. Key Findings
5. Display vs. Non-Display Bill-of-Materials
6. Primary Display Technology
7. Primary Display Size
8. Primary Display Resolution
9. Primary Display Pixel Density
10. Trends in Secondary Displays
11. Portelligent Technology Alert Service (TAS) - Display Notes
12. Phone Display Archetypes—Details
|
Tables
1: 2006 Cell Phone Archetype by IC BOM Segment
2: Image at Various Pixel Densities
|
Figures
1: IC BOM Segmentation Ranges 2003-2007
2: Display vs. Non-Display Bill-of-Materials
3: Display as a Percentage of Total Bill-of-Materials
4: Primary Display Technology Distribution
5: Primary Display Pixel Density by Technology
6: High and Ultra-high IC BOM Segment Primary Display Technology Distribution by
Manufacturer
7: Primary Display Diagonal Dimension
8: Cell Phone Footprint L x W
9: Primary Display Resolution Distribution
10: Cell Phone Display Pixel Densities (Pixels per inch)
11: Secondary Display Technology Distribution
12: Secondary Display Diagonal Dimension
13: Secondary Display Resolution Distribution
14: Secondary Display Pixel Density (Pixels per inch)
15: Ultra-low Segment Phone Display—Bird S198+
16: Low Segment Phone Display—Tianyu B811
17: Mid Segment Phone Displays—Motorola RAZR V3i
18: High Segment Phone Displays—Samsung SGH-Z510
19: Ultra-high Segment Phone Displays—Nokia N93
|
|
Value
|
View us as a wide-angle lens on the personal electronics landscape. We don't replace
your expertise and insight, but rather amplify your capabilities and knowledge.
Quantitative and qualitative information resources let you answer business-critical
questions:
- What enabling electronics technologies are being developed and how will they affect
end-products?
- How are my competitors designing with new technologies?
- How does my company compare in competitive benchmarking?
- What technology opportunities are implied from trends in product implementation?
- How will the product features that users want affect our design and technology decisions?
|
|
Price
|
$4,500 Single Print Report Price - Call for Pricing with Database Extract and Three
Teardown Reports
Order Now
|
|
|
Trends in Cell Phone Processing
Architecture |
|
Introduction
|
The evolution of the processing architecture in cell
phones began in 1983 with the launch of the Motorola DynaTAC 8000x. At a height
of nearly 20cm (excluding antenna), a weight of 670 grams, a talk time of one hour,
and a purchase price of almost $4,000, the novel concept of mobile telephone communications
was limited to a few, wealthy individuals for only brief periods of time unless
one was in close proximity to an electrical outlet. The processing requirements
for the mobile communications and the functionality of storing and recalling a limited
amount of phone numbers found in the DynaTAC were satisfied by a single-processor
architecture combined with a discrete transmitter, receiver, and power-management
integrated circuit (IC).
Moving ahead almost 20 years to 2002, over 80% of the
cell phones analyzed by Portelligent still incorporated the single-chip baseband
processor architecture along with the discrete transmitters, receivers, and power
management ICs reminiscent of the architecture utilized in the DynaTAC while providing
the same basic functionality of mobile communications and storing and retrieving
phone numbers. Some of the more advanced basebands in 2002 provided enough processing
power headroom for cell phone designers to incorporate additional features, such
as text messaging, syncing with a personal computer, and basic gaming. Between 2002
and 2005, an increasing percentage of the mobile phones launched into the market
integrated digital cameras and made use of full-featured operating systems, which
allowed the user to install third-party applications. The additional processing
requirements related to these features began to put a strain on the processing capability
of cellular basebands designed primarily for voice-only mobile communications. As
a result, 80% of the phones analyzed by Portelligent that had a camera or utilized
a full-featured operating system in 2005 relied on an architecture with a cellular
baseband and an additional processor.
The growth of the cell phone
market combined with the increasing use of additional processors to power additional
integrated features created new opportunities for companies such as ATI, Intel (now
Marvell), MtekVision, Nvidia, Samsung, and Texas Instruments. Recent trends, however,
indicate the resurgence of a single-chip processor architecture in cell phones due
to advances in multi-core processor design and reductions in die size related to
process technology improvements. In just the last two years of teardown analyses
on cell phones with a camera or a full-featured operating system, the proportion
of devices analyzed by Portelligent incorporating a single-chip processing architecture
has grown from 20% in 2005 to 40% in 2007.
|
|
Report Description
|
This report, based on over 340 Portelligent cell phone
teardowns,
will show how the trends in cell-phone processing architectures have evolved over
the last five years. The report will answer such critical questions
as:
1.
What features
of the cell phone have driven the use of the various processing architectures?
2.
How does
the processing architecture of the cell phone impact memory and IC component counts?
3.
How are
architectures in ultra low-end, voice-only cell phones evolving?
4.
Which chipset
manufacturer has the most die-area efficient processing architecture to support
the various air interfaces and camera resolutions?
How has the transition to the latest generation of air
interfaces affected processing architectures and the related die area of the components?
|
|
Content
|
Table of Contents
Tables
Figures
1. Executive Summary
2. Portelligent IC BOM Segmentation Model
3. Cell Phone Processing Architecture Combinations
4. Impact of Operating Systems on Architectures
5. Architecture Trends in GSM RTOS Phones
6. Architecture Trends in GPRS and EDGE RTOS Phones
7. Architecture Trends in GPRS and EDGE FFOS Phones
8. Architecture Trends in W-CDMA and HSDPA RTOS Phones
9. Architecture Trends in W-CDMA and HSDPA FFOS Phones
10. Architecture Trends in CDMA2000 1X and CDMA2000 1xEV- DO RTOS Phones
11. Architecture Trends in CDMA2000 1X and CDMA2000 1xEV- DO FFOS Phones
12. Concluding Remarks and Predictions
13. 2007-2008 Die Area Best-in-Class Processing Architecture
Implementations
|
Tables
1: Cell Phone Archetypes by Processing Architecture
2: Cell Phone Archetypes by Processing Architecture
—Continued
|
Figures
1: Percentage of Phones Analyzed with an Application Processor
by OS
2:
Average MB
of Phone Memory for Architectures with and without an Application Processor
3: Average Phone IC Component Count for Architectures
with and without an Application Processor
4: Average Die Area for Components in GSM RTOS Phones
by Chipset Designer
5: Percentage of GPRS RTOS Phones Analyzed by Processing
Architecture
6: Percentage of EDGE RTOS Phones Analyzed by Processing
Architecture
7: Average Die Area by Processing Architecture and Component
for GPRS and EDGE RTOS Camera Phones
8: Percentage of GPRS and EDGE FFOS Phones
Analyzed by Processing Architecture
9: Average Die Area by Processing Architecture and Processor
for GPRS and EDGE FFOS Phones
10. Percentage of W-CDMA and HSDPA RTOS Phones Analyzed
by Processing Architecture
11: Average Die Area by Processing Architecture and Component
for W-CDMA and HSDPA RTOS Phones
12: Percentage of W-CDMA and HSDPA FFOS Phones Analyzed
by Processing Architecture
13: Average Die Area by Processing Architecture and Component
for W-CDMA and HSDPA FFOS Phones
14: Percentage of CDMA2000 1X and 1xEV-DO RTOS Phones
Analyzed by Processing Architecture
15: Average Die Area by Processing Architecture and Component
for CDMA2000 1X and 1xEV-DO RTOS Phones
16: Die Area by Processing Architecture and Component
for CDMA2000 1X and 1xEV-DO FFOS Phones
|
|
Value
|
View us as a wide-angle lens on the personal electronics
landscape. We don't replace your expertise and insight, but rather amplify your
capabilities and knowledge. Quantitative and qualitative information resources let
you answer business-critical questions:
- What enabling electronics technologies are being developed
and how will they affect end-products?
- How are my competitors designing with new technologies?
- How does my company compare in competitive benchmarking?
- What technology opportunities are implied from trends
in product implementation?
How will the product features that users want affect our
design and technology decisions?
|
|
Price
|
Call for Pricing and delivery options.
Order Now
|
|
|
Trends in Cell Phone Memory |
|
Introduction
|
With the launch of the 4GB and 8GB Apple iPhone in June 2007, memory, for the first
time, became a feature that a cell phone manufacturer could use to differentiate
otherwise identical products. Quickly following the launch of the Apple iPhone,
Nokia responded with an 8GB version of the N95 for the US market. The European version
of the N95, launched in March 2007, had provided only 160MB of user memory. Sony
Ericsson even preempted the iPhone launch by two weeks with an announcement of an
8GB W960 Walkman music phone, which is expected to be available in select markets
starting this quarter. Clearly, memory has become a feature by which cell phone
manufacturers are attempting to differentiate their offerings or match competitive
products.
Even before the recent flurry of cell phones and cell phone announcements with gigabyte-plus
memory capacities, memory, both volatile and non-volatile, underwent dramatic changes
in type, quantity, and capacity over the last four years. Although not typically
marketed as a product differentiator, user memory was a key contributor to changes
in memory components in cell phones. Other factors having varying impacts on memory
type, quantity, and capacity include cell phone system architectures, cellular code
space requirements, user memory, and pre-installed application space requirements.
|
|
Report Description
|
This report, based on Portelligent product teardowns, will show how the trends in
cell phone memory have evolved over the last four years. The report will answer
such critical questions as:
1. How have the costs related to changes in memory in cell phones compared to other
key components in the cell phone, and what impact have these changes had on the
overall cost of the cell phone?
2. What is the average quantity and capacity of memory in the various cell phone
market segments, and how has it changed over the last four years?
3. What type, quantity, and capacity of memory components are being used with the
various cell phone architectures that a product designer has at their disposal?
4. What has had the biggest impact on memory in cell phones—user memory, cell phone
system architecture, OS/application memory requirements, or cellular communications
software memory requirements?
|
|
Content
|
Table of Contents
Tables
Figures
1. Executive Summary
2. Portelligent IC BOM Segmentation Model
3. Definition of Terms
4. Key Findings
5. Memory Bill-of-Materials Trends
6. Memory Capacity Trends
7. Cost/MB Trends
8. Cell Phone System Architecture
9. System Architecture—Memory Dependencies
10. Memory Architecture
11. Impact of Cellular Protocols on Non-Volatile Memory
12. User Memory and OS/Applications
13. Portelligent Technology Alert Service (TAS) - Memory Notes
14. 2006 Phone Memory Archetypes—Details
|
Tables
1: 2006 Cell Phone Archetype by IC BOM Segment
2: 2006-2007 Cell Phone System Architecture Archetypes
|
Figures
1: IC BOM Segmentation Ranges 2003-2007
2: Average Cell Phone Memory Bill-of-Materials Cost by IC BOM Segment
3: Average Cell Phone Memory Bill-of-Materials Cost Distribution by IC BOM Segment
4: Ratio of Memory Cost to the Overall BOM Cost by IC BOM Segment (Min., Max., Avg.)
5: Average Cell Phone Memory by IC BOM Segment
6: Average Cell Phone Memory MB/$1 by IC BOM Segment
7: Cell Phone System Architecture Distribution by IC BOM Segment
8: 2006 Memory Capacity by IC BOM Segment and System Architecture
9: 2006 Memory Capacity by IC BOM Segment and Memory Architecture
10. 2006 Memory Capacity Distribution by IC BOM Segment and Memory Architecture
11: Minimum Non-Volatile Memory by Cellular Protocol
12: Percent of Phones with an External Memory Slot
13: Average User Memory in Cell Phones
14: Average Reserved Non-Volatile Memory in Cell Phones
15: Ultra-low Segment Phone Memory—Bird S198+
16: Low Segment Phone Memory—Lenovo E317
17: Mid Segment Phone Memory—Motorola RAZR V3i
18: High Segment Phone Memory—LG-CU500
19: Ultra-high Segment Phone Memory—Nokia N93
|
|
Value
|
View us as a wide-angle lens on the personal electronics landscape. We don't replace
your expertise and insight, but rather amplify your capabilities and knowledge.
Quantitative and qualitative information resources let you answer business-critical
questions:
- What enabling electronics technologies are being developed and how will they affect
end-products?
- How are my competitors designing with new technologies?
- How does my company compare in competitive benchmarking?
- What technology opportunities are implied from trends in product implementation?
- How will the product features that users want affect our design and technology decisions?
|
|
Price
|
$4,000 Single Print Report Price - Call for Pricing with Database Extract and Three
Teardown Reports
Order Now
|
|
|
Battle of the Email Machines |
|
Introduction
|
Recent high visibility product launches of
the Q from Motorola and the E61 from Nokia highlight the importance of the QWERTY
cellular e-mail phone (E-Mail Machine) in the product portfolios of cell phone manufacturers.
The well-publicized success of RIM and Palm, who have focused their efforts on integrating
cellular and e-mail capabilities into a handset with a QWERTY keyboard, has pushed
the leading phone makers to develop similar devices. On top of RIM and Palm's success,
other recent trends and events have caused most of the major cell phone OEMs to
launch or have in planning an E-Mail Machine. With nearly every professional granted
an e-mail account at his or her place of employment on top of the personal e-mail
account(s) one may have, the ability to obtain and respond to e-mail anytime, anyplace
has become a necessity. In addition, push e-mail capabilities, which were once relegated
to RIM only devices, are beginning to be realized on a number of different phones
through push e-mail solutions from Good Technology, Intellisync, and Microsoft.
|
|
Report Description
|
With the emergence of device agnostic push
e-mail solutions, it has become more important than ever for the phone OEMs to provide
the best, lowest cost QWERTY cellular e-mail phones that meet the needs of their
customers. This report will provide an in-depth hardware and cost comparison across
three of the most recent offerings from Motorola, Nokia, and RIM including the:
Q, E61, and 8700c, respectively. Key findings, supply chain impact, and forecast
configurations of a 2007 Mid Segment and Ultra High Segment e-mail machine are provided.
The report will also answer the following critical questions:
- How similar are the three e-mail machines
in architecture, design metrics, and components suppliers?
- How do the design metrics of the three
e-mail machines compare to other cell phone design metrics?
- What are the features and design metrics
of a late 2007 Mid Segment and Ultra High Segment e-mail machine?
- How did they make the Motorola "Q" so thin?
|
|
|
|
|
Content
|
Table of Contents
Tables
Figures
1. Executive Summary
2. Key Findings
3. Definition of Terms
4. Portelligent IC BOM Segmentation Model
5. Specifications and Features
6. Hardware Bill-of-Materials Comparison
7. Design Comparison
7.1 Block Diagrams
7.2 IC Die and Package Metrics
7.3 Discretes, Modules, Odd Components, Substrate, and Final Assembly
7.4 Displays
7.5 Wireless Connectivity
7.6 Input
7.7 Battery
8. Major IC Supply Chain Comparison
9. Forecast: Q4 2007 Mid Segment and Ultra High Segment E-Mail Machine Configurations
10. Conclusion
11. The E-Mail Machine in 2007: Driving Questions
|
Tables
Table 1: IC BOM Segmentation Ranges 2005-2007
Table 2: E-Mail Machines Speci | | |