In a previous life I did some work for Intel's mobile and wireless folks. One thing I learned is they were inherited from Motorola and are based in Chandler, Arizona, rather than in San Jose.

They're pretty easy to scam.

Rather than insisting on the Intel way, which is to define a robust, modular scalable standard that can handle multiple generations of product, these guys follow their competitors' rules. They essentially beg manufacturers to take their products, then trumpet the announcement like it's a big deal when, in fact, it's not. Just beause the maker of a mobile product decides they'll try your stuff doesn't mean they're committing to it -- they commit to what sells.

Thus, the news Intel trumpeted last week about Nokia switching to it has to be pulled back this week.

What are the true facts?

The true fact is that Nokia is willing to have Intel work with Symbian, its OS provider, and see if they can do something better than what they have with Texas Instruments. It's a little intra-preneurship, and the idea is that all the work will be done on Intel's dime. (You'll see the reason for this illustration, from a 2001 USA Today story, very shortly.)

This is what you have to do, the manufacturer thinks, if you want to overthrow an incumbent. Show me you can do better, guarantee you can do better, and then maybe I'll consider it.

What Intel's PR people trumpeted as a sale was, in fact, nothing more than a foot in the door.

Intel's mobile people have done this time-and-time again. I know, for instance, that Cisco had a piece of Intel gear on its shelves for some time, in the 802.11 space, but it never pushed the thing, preferring to go with cheap gear using Broadcom chips.

Why? Because the Broadcom stuff was cheaper, and customers didn't know the difference.

If Intel wants to be a player in mobile technology, it needs to take some advice from Ted Turner. Lead, follow, or get out of the way. And add to that Dana's Corollary -- following ain't working.