NVIDIA Corporation [stckqut]NVDA[/stckqut] is driven by “specialized computing,” that is, the transforming of specific software tasks into physical silicon chips instead of depending on an ever-faster do-it-all CPU, or central processing unit. It has existed in some form or another for decades, but it has lately become the driving force behind pretty much everything cool in technology, from artificial intelligence to self-driving cars. Why? Because those CPUs aren’t getting faster at the pace they once were. Moore’s Law is dying.

Moore’s Law is the notion that, every two years or so, the number of transistors in a chip doubles. Its popular conception is that computers keep getting faster, smaller and more power-efficient. That isn’t happening the way it used to. “It’s not like Moore’s Law is going to hit a brick wall — it’s going to kind of sputter to an end,” says Daniel Reed, chair of computational science and bioinformatics at the University of Iowa.

As Intel and the other chip foundries spend fortunes to keep the wheel turning, chip designers across the industry are finding creative ways to continue at the old pace of Moore’s Law, and in many cases increase device performance even more quickly.

“Most of the advances today come from [chip] design and software,” says Nvidia chief scientist William Dally. “For us it’s been a challenge because we feel under a lot of pressure to constantly deliver twice the performance per generation,” he adds. So far, Nvidia has accomplished that cadence even when the size of the elements on the chip doesn’t change, and the only thing that does is its design, or “architecture.”

Here’s a less-than-exhaustive list of all the applications to which the principle of specialized computing has been applied: Artificial intelligence, image recognition, self-driving cars, virtual reality, bitcoin mining, drones, data centers, even photography. Pretty much every technology company that makes hardware or supplies it — including Apple, Samsung, Amazon, Qualcomm, Nvidia, Broadcom, Intel, Huawei and Xiaomi — is exploiting this phenomenon. Even companies that only produce chips for their own use, including Microsoft, Google, and Facebook, are doing it.

Many years ago, almost all computing was done with the CPU, one thing after another in sequence, says Keith Kressin, a senior vice president at Qualcomm. Gradually, often-used but processor-intensive tasks were diverted to specialized chips. Those tasks were processed in parallel, while the CPU did only what was absolutely required.

These task-focused chips come in a wide variety, reflecting the breadth of their uses, and the lines between them can be blurry. One kind, the graphics processing unit — think Nvidia and gamers — found wider use for tasks to which it’s uniquely suited, including artificial intelligence. Later on, the rise of smartphones created a gigantic need for another type, digital signal processing chips, designed to enhance photography, for example.

Source: How Chip Designers Are Breaking Moore’s Law – WSJ

Some things, even huge piles of money can’t buy.

One of those things might be the ability to unseat Amazon.com Inc.’s [stckqut]AMZN[/stckqut] AWS as the king of the cloud computing market. Not that others haven’t made a game effort. The two largest challengers— Microsoft Corp.[stckqut]MSFT[/stckqut] and Google parent Alphabet Inc.[stckqut]GOOGL[/stckqut]—have dropped about $52 billion combined in capital expenditures over the past three years, much of which goes toward their massive networks of data centers and related equipment. That’s double what the two spent over the previous three-year period.

It’s not been without results. Microsoft’s Azure cloud service more than doubled its revenue in 2016 to about $2.7 billion, according to estimates from J.P. Morgan. Google’s Cloud Platform surpassed $1 billion in revenue in 2016, estimates Aaron Kessler of Raymond James.

The latter is particularly of note, given that it’s been barely a year since Google brought in former VMware chief Diane Greene to run the cloud division and focus on enterprise customers. It took AWS at least five years to hit the $1 billion mark, judging from Amazon’s limited disclosures at the time.

Source: Amazon Rivals Have Big Clouds to Fill – WSJ

After beating expectations in its first two FY 2016 earnings reports,Microsoft’s [stckqut]MSFT[/stckqut] multi-year turnaround seemed like it might finally have taken root. Unfortunately, its earnings miss last week came as a sharp rebuke to that idea, a fact not missed by investors.

To chart its path into the post-PC world, Microsoft has placed aggressive bets in growth markets, including big data and productivity tools. At the same time, many view Microsoft’s cloud-computing business as, perhaps, the company’s biggest opportunity, which is why investors should take note of the relatively weak performance of its cloud business this past quarter.

Though far from cataclysmic, Microsoft’s cloud business showed several signs of weakness in Q3, especially when considered in total. For starters, though growing faster than other reporting segments, Microsoft’s intelligent cloud business produced its slowest growth thus far in its fiscal 2016.

Source: Are Microsoft’s Weakening Cloud Margins a Cause for Concern?

Apple [stckqut]AAPL[/stckqut] is known for brutal efficiency, regularly killing off features and products that no longer serve its purposes.

So there is irony in the fact investors have taken a similarly ruthless view of Apple itself, penalizing the company heavily ahead of what is expected to be the slowest year on record for its key product: the iPhone. Apple’s share price ended 2015 down 4.6%, marking its first drop in seven years. That selloff looks overdone, even if one accepts the prevailing view that the iPhone 6s won’t sell at a pace anything like that of its predecessor.

Consider that Apple is now the cheapest stock among the 10 largest tech companies in the S&P 500, once its huge net cash pile of $150 billion is excluded. That means Apple is cheaper than other growth-challenged giants like Microsoft [stckqut]MSFT[/stckqut], Oracle, Cisco Systems [stckqut]CSCO[/stckqut] and International Business Machines [stckqut]IBM[/stckqut].

Source: Apple Peeled: Getting Under the Skin of iPhone Worries

I don’t try to predict why a stock is going up based on market conditions. That strategy is simply fraught with danger that I try to avoid.

I frequently get emails, comments on my site, or Twitter questions regarding my opinion on a particular news story. The questioner is almost always asking for my opinion on the news’ affect on a certain stock.

I strongly urge investors to not worry about such details. I realize that Jim Cramer of Mad Money will often discuss the reaction of a stock to a news item. As a case in point, Mr. Cramer recently tweeted on news of gasoline prices potentially dropping and its influence on the retail segment. Jim is incredibly smart and immensely popular. I enjoy watching his television shows. However, I think that using this information to control your investment is unwise for the individual investor.

As I pointed out in an earlier article, the influence of the news on a particular stock is typically extremely short lived. There was a recent study by an analyst  firm that looked at the help wanted ads for Microsoft [stckqut]MSFT[/stckqut] in order to get an insight into Microsoft’s focus for development. I laughed when I saw that story. The recruitment process by a company has nothing to do with the immediate quarterly success of the company. The long-term success of the company obviously depends on its future investments (which I wrote about here) but to try to predict the success of the company based on who they are going to hire in the short-term is giving far too much omniscience to the analysts doing the study.

I honestly do not think that it is necessary to make such deep analysis to be successful. As I teach in my book, The Confident Investor, most of the analysis can be reduced to a 10-year analysis on 4 different metrics combined with a current analysis of two more metrics. This gives you the capability of finding truly exceptional companies. You should grow your investment in those Good Companies using technical trading tools that control your trades.

It is entertaining and educational to listen to Jim Cramer explain how the various macro factors affect a company or an industry. I am sure that he is often correct. However, I don’t suggest that the individual investor repeats this effort.

You can purchase my book wherever books are sold such as AmazonBarnes and Noble, and Books A Million. It is available in e-book formats for NookKindle, and iPad.