????芯片業的冤家對手——ARM和英特爾（Intel）的CEO更迭計劃日前大局已定。但彼此間的戰役不會有任何改變。兩家公司都選定了長期效力公司的內部人士來執掌大權——英特爾原首席運營官布萊恩?克蘭尼克于上周接任CEO，ARM現任總裁西蒙?希加斯也將于7月接班。因此，很難想象兩個陣營哪個會做出全方位的改變。而且，向高通（Qualcomm）、英偉達（Nvidia）等提供芯片架構授權的ARM是否需要大規模轉變也不清楚。英國芯片設計公司ARM的規模雖然遠小于英特爾，但它并不依賴于死氣沉沉的PC市場。ARM架構芯片在移動手機市場的份額高達95%，并正在嘗試開拓低功耗服務器等新市場。日前，《財富》雜志（Fortune）專訪了ARM即將上任的 CEO希加斯，探討了他對公司的長遠規劃、與英特爾的競爭以及摩爾定律的現狀。

????《財富》雜志：人們經常將你們與英特爾作為競爭對手相提并論，但你們的模式完全不同。經常這樣對比，公平嗎？

????希格斯：英特爾是一家半導體公司；我們不是。高通、三星（Samsung）、英偉達、Marvell等都是半導體公司。移動設備領域的競爭是在英特爾和其他這些半導體公司之間進行的。其他這些半導體公司都使用ARM架構。但從業務層面來看，是英特爾與ARM的客戶在競爭。我們很重視這一點。這是插槽爭奪戰，是英特爾與我們的授權產品競爭，我們不能坐視一旁，告訴客戶說，“很遺憾你失去了那個插槽位置。”如果失去了這些插槽位置，我們的銷量和特許授權費都會受到影響。因此，我們需要不斷地開發一流的微處理技術，幫助我們的客戶創造出提供最佳用戶體驗的產品。

????英特爾最出色的資產是其芯片制造廠和制造能力。你們呢？

????我認為是合作企業。你可以有很棒的技術，但最出色的技術不一定能勝出。對于我們而言，這就是將優秀的技術融入商業模式，讓ARM獲得成功，幫助人們以更低的成本打造創新設備。我認為，這樣做的好處在于可以讓半導體產品更加多元化，進而推動終端產品的多樣化。這關乎更多的選擇：作為消費者，你可以走進商店買到自己想要的東西，“我要那個”。你會有非常多的選擇，因為在供應鏈的不同環節都會有資金用于創新，不像PC行業由兩家分掌，制造PC者的利潤率只有2%，除了改改塑料顏色，再也無力承擔更多創新。

????Much has been made of the upcoming leadership transitions at chip rivals ARM (ARMH) and Intel (INTC). But it's unlikely that the battle plan will change for either side. Both companies chose long-time insiders to take the helm—Intel COO Brian Krzanich will become CEO later this week, and ARM's Simon Segars, currently the company's president, takes over in July. So it's hard to imagine sweeping changes in either camp. Besides, it's not clear that ARM, which licenses its chip architecture to the likes of Qualcomm (QCOM) and Nvidia (NVDA), is in need of massive transformation. Though much smaller than Intel, the British chip designer isn't dependent on the lackluster PC market. ARM-based chips power 95% of mobile phones, and the company is now trying to venture into new markets like lower-power servers. Fortune recently caught up with Segars, ARM's incoming CEO, to find out about his plans for the company, the rivalry with Intel and the state of Moore's Law.

????FORTUNE: You're often viewed as head-to-head competitors with Intel, yet you have such a different model. Is it fair to constantly compare you to them?

????Segars: Intel is a semiconductor company; we are not. Qualcomm, Samsung, Nvidia, Marvell, etc. are semiconductor companies. In the mobile device, the competition is between Intel and all those other guys. All those other guys use the ARM architecture and are dependent on us to keep that relevant. But at the business level it's Intel competing against ARM's customers. For our part we take that very seriously. It's a competition for sockets among Intel and our licensees, and we can't just sait there and say, "Sorry you lost that one." Because if those sockets are lost, then it impacts our volumes and our royalties. So we need to be sure that we keep developing great microprocessor technology to help support our customers in creating products which deliver the best user experience.

????Intel's greatest asset is its fabs and manufacturing power. What's yours?

????I think it's the partnership base. You can have great technology, but the best technology doesn't always win out. For us it's been the combination of great technology deployed through the business model that has made ARM successful, and it's helped people build innovative devices at lower cost. I think the benefit of that has been greater diversity in the silicon that's enabled greater diversity in the end product. It's about enabling choice so that as a consumer you can go into a store and go, "I'll have that one." You've got a lot of choice there because there is money available through the supply chain for innovation to happen at different points, unlike PCs where two people have controlled it and the person that makes PCs runs on 2% profit margin and can't afford to innovate in anything other than which shade of grey the plastic is.