Not sure about the end of x86 but he is right about one point I've been shouting about for years; mainstream computers are far too powerful for the average user. My mother reads mail and watches pictures of kids/grandkids with her computer; what is the i7/8gb/500gb with a crapload of gpu cores for? Why pay for that kind of power while a cheap Android laptop would easily suffice? My parents, grandparents, uncles or even my siblings and cousins have 0 need for that power nor for Windows. None of them. They notice the difference when they have/touch an iPad or Android pad/computer; they find it easier to wield; they use a handful of apps anyway. So because it has manufacturing advantages, Intel, in my eyes, doesn't have to strive for power or compatibility for the future chips; they just need to use almost no battery. Only thing I hear non computer savvy people talk about is battery life and 'clear screen'. So high res (nexus 10) screens, screens you can view without squeezing your eyes in bright sunlight, solar cells invisibly built in and a few days battery life for a <= $500 price and you'll be selling until silicon runs out.
Even for coding you don't really need all that power most of the time; if you are compiling big source trees, sure, but why not just do that in the cloud at EC2 or a dedi server? So you can freely work on your laptop. Game playing and very heavy graphical or music work I can see you need a fast computer in front of your nose for, but further?
Even for coding you don't really need all that power most of the time; if you are compiling big source trees, sure, but why not just do that in the cloud at EC2 or a dedi server? So you can freely work on your laptop. Game playing and very heavy graphical or music work I can see you need a fast computer in front of your nose for, but further?