Intel: "CUDA Is Dead, Larrabee Rules"

While Intel and NVidia have a common opponent, AMD/ATI, they are also 2 competing chipset and processor manufacturing company. If NVidia is mostly doing the design and outsourcing production, Intel does both. They recently entered into a open fight regarding the future of CPU and GPU. In both case, the predicted increase of core numbers in processors opens the door to huge performance gain. As NVidia is backing the potential of GPU to perform other task than 2D/3D rendering, Intel is predicting that in a near future one would not need GPU anymore, as some cores of a CPU could be dedicated to such function.
NVidia is promoting its CUDA programming language, attacking directly Intel on its data processing arena. CUDA makes it possible to perform intensive and complex physics calculations on the GPU, enabling physics engine like PhysX on the GPU.
the last comment from Intel about CUDA: "NVIDIA’s CUDA programming model would be nothing more than an interesting footnote in the annals of computing history." To backup such statement, Intel’s Pat Gelsinger, co-general manager of Intel’s Digital Enterprise Group, explained that developers will not have time to deeply invest into learning how to program for new architectures like CUDA. At the opposite, Intel’s Larrabee graphics chip will be entirely based on Intel Architecture x86 cores making it easier for developers to program for the graphics processor without requiring learning a new coding language. In addition, Larrabee will have full support for existing APIs like DirectX and OpenGL.
It is now clear that Intel and NVidia will keep fighting about the best future for our computers, should it be fully GPU or fully CPU? and what about AMD, does the company still have to say something, or being able to play a role in this fight?