The low-power big thing that the ARM is most valued for today, the reason that it's on all your mobile phones, was a complete accident," Wilson says. "It was ten times lower than Steve had expected. That's really the result of not having the right sort of tools."
The implication is that (a) the lower power design of the ARM was discovered by accident, and (b) the right set of tools would have lead to a predictable outcome.
This seems strange. One would have thought you could predict the power consumption of a device using physics and scientific models.
My question is: Why isn't the approach to lower power CPUs guided by design rather than accident?