Re: Intel gets ranked No.3 for Corporate Citizenship !
A lot like when the UN puts Libya in charge of human rights.
Is Tyan hamstrung by Intel pressure?
Opinion Nothing effusive in Opteron launch
By Mario Rodrigues: Wednesday 07 May 2003, 14:59
IN JUNE 2001 when AMD launched its Athlon MP platform, Tyan was the only name in town when it came to motherboard support. Tyan had about a six-month head start before the other system board players entered the fray. It's fair to say that Tyan did an excellent job in bringing credibility to AMD's first dual-processor platform.
I give this historical perspective in light of the latest revelations concerning alleged Intel heavy- handedness with its partners, which wish to support the AMD64 platform. We know we won't be seeing a Solectron motherboard for Opteron anytime soon, and there was a lack of vendor hardware displayed at the AMD launch of Opteron. All very disconcerting.
Just over a week ago, the INQUIRER ran a story about Tyan's Thunder K8 S2880 motherboard for Opteron. It was shipping, and system integrators were already selling systems based on that board.
Great I thought. I'll visit Tyan's website and read about its latest shipping product. But next to nothing could be found about that motherboard. A Tyan search for K8, Opteron, and S2880 did unearth one page that gave evidence of the board's existence. Why wasn't Tyan blowing off its trumpet about its latest top of the line product? Remember, this is six days after Opteron's launch.
Two paragraphs from that one page reference does expose the pressure that Tyan is under when it has to position AMD64 products against Intel-based solutions:
"The newest AMD platform showing at CeBIT includes the Thunder K8 S2880, the ideal Opteron(tm) solution for rackmount and pedestal servers. Based on AMD's latest chipset technology, its key features are dual channel 128-bit Registered DDR333/266 for speed and stability, IPMI v1.5 remote management for convenient control, and dual channel Ultra320 SCSI and optional Serial ATA for maximum storage."
"Another server system board is the Tiger i7501 S2723 [that] delivers exceptional features and performance for all server requirements. It supports two Intel(r) Xeon(tm) processors with 533MHz system bus with the Hyper-Threading Technology, Intel(r) E7501 chipset, remote management of IPMI functions, ATX12V and EPS12V compatibility, and Gigabit and Fast Ethernet ports."
Note the use of the word "ideal" to describe the AMD64 platform, and the word "exceptional" to describe the Xeon-based solution. The tone is totally different. Whoever wrote that press release didn't want to upset the 800 Ib gorilla. It's obvious to anyone who has read the Opteron server reviews that Xeon is now yesterday's technology. I'm sure Tyan's in-house testing also made that abundantly clear. Tyan isn't saying that the i7501 has "exceptional features and performance" because the benchmarks said so, it is taking that line for political expediency.
I returned to Tyan's web site and found its Opteron motherboard predicament had improved. The press release had been published, but the language used to describe the product is still very much underplayed:
From the Opteron system board press release:
"The Thunder K8S S2880 offers unique features designed specifically for rackmount and pedestal servers. It is the first dual AMD Opteron(tm) processor platform that offers both Serial ATA and SCSI options for high storage capabilities, while dual Gigabit Ethernet LAN ports heighten network connectivity and bandwidth on a PCI-X bus. In addition, its low profile I/O ports and its six strategically placed front-to-back aligned memory slots supporting up to 12GB allow maximum airflow across the platform for effective system cooling."
From the Xeon system board press release:
"Tyan(r) launches the new Thunder i7501 Xtreme S2726, a server platform designed for today's intense bandwidth, I/O, and data communications needs. This full-featured systemboard provides unprecedented performance, scalability, and reliability by including four Gigabit Ethernet ports, one Fast Ethernet port, five separate PCI-X/PCI buses, 533Mhz Front Side Bus, Intel(r) Hyper-Threading Technology, and an optional dual channel Adaptec(r) Ultra320 SCSI controller with Zero Channel RAID support."
Again note the use of the word "unique" to describe the AMD64 platform, and the word "unprecedented" to describe the Xeon-based solution. Again the tone is totally different. If it's the same person who's writing this embellished fiction, then it shouldn't be a surprise that none of it is attributable. Knowing how Opteron leaves Xeon eating dust, would you risk your credibility by signing off on such yarns?
Makes one wonder why Tyan didn't kit out its Opteron system board with a full complement of DIMM slots. Is this visionary? Or is it design guidance from Intel? MSI has done the same with both of its Opteron boards. One would have thought that the low cost of 512 and 1024 MB RAM sticks would have made using eight DIMM slots mandatory.
Fortunately for the people who buy Tyan products, they're not going to be your average Joe. They'll know their system requirements, they will have thoroughly researched their options, which means they'll end up purchasing a board or system that best meets their needs. With that said, it's very sad to see Tyan pandering to Intel, even though its actions shouldn't impact the buying decisions of the vast majority of its customers.
One thing that Tyan has to be very wary of is the possible filing of a lawsuit that alleges product misrepresentation. Remember that Intel, HP, and Gateway could end up defending such a case, which alleges that the Pentium 4 was misrepresented.
Imagine a buyer of IT that took Tyan's literature as being literal for how the hundred Xeon-based systems he purchased would perform. After six months of intensive growth, his systems had reached their scalable limits, which meant new systems would have to be purchased. This very much surprised the IT buyer because he thought these were the very best systems available. Doing some research, he discovers the scalability attributes of the AMD64 platform, which would have offered far superior performance at significantly less cost. Feeling that he had been deceived by Tyan's literature, he contacts his counsel to file suit.
With the kind of people that buy Tyan's products, the scenario outlined would likely not happen. But of course, there is a chance that it could. The point I'm really making here is that for Tyan, it's not good business to be exaggerating the claims of its Xeon-platform server products, especially when those claims don't even pass a cursory examination. If the scenario outlined was ever successfully prosecuted, it could prove to be expensive for Tyan and its shareholders.
If Tyan really needs to couch its literature language to "keep its handlers happy," and avoid those "negative impacts" that "could" effect its business, it should change its language to say the "best Xeon-based solution," which would avoid the open-ended language that could land Tyan in court.
Tyan's web site also reveals an order of events that is disturbing. Its press release web page is just incredulous. Tyan has a press release for April 22nd, the launch day for Opteron, but no mention of Opteron, AMD, or even its own Opteron motherboard; amazing. The release was all about a new Intel-platform motherboard. Was Tyan trying to make an oblique political point? If it was, it certainly succeeded.
Is Tyan "really free" to market its products for the best interests of itself and its customers? Do you really believe that Tyan would publish a press release for a new Intel-platform motherboard on the exact same day that AMD launched its Opteron processor, and then delay for a week any formal mention of its own Opteron motherboard while it's shipped to integrators for selling on? In an open and free market, what Tyan did would be considered unconscionable. It doesn't make any economic sense to do such a thing unless an external party had leveraged "consequences" that would follow if actions pertaining to "other" products hadn't been entertained.
With Solectron having been allegedly nobbled, the formal product announcement delay at Tyan, and the lack of vendor hardware displayed at the AMD launch of Opteron - this reveals that the trend of heavy-handedness continues. This was apparent at the launch of Athlon. Motherboard manufacturers were fearful of reprisals, so many of them shipped their products in white boxes to conceal the vendor's identity. I actually purchased one of those boards. The box, manual, and CDROM gave no clue to the name of the manufacturer. The ECS emblem was noted on the heat sink of the motherboard's northbridge. The manual was titled: K7AML-A+ Mainboard. A Google search indicated an ECS link. It was confirmed at ECS's US web site. My ECS board's "official" name is K7ASA. The picture and spec are an exact match to my board. Is all of this really cricket? Talk about kicking the underdog when he's already lying down.
With all of this alleged underhandedness going on, has it effected the choice and availability of Opteron server motherboards? Well, that's debatable. Tyan, RioWorks, MSI, Iwill, and Newisys have successfully launched their system board products. I've seen pictures of one other motherboard, but I've not yet been able to match it to a vendor. Solectron perhaps? The Newisys motherboard cannot be purchased on its own, so this leaves three manufacturers competing for Opteron system board business. I say three because the Iwill board is just a rebadged RioWorks board. The DIMM slot shortfall on the MSI and Tyan products has been discussed. Fortunately, the RioWorks board does not suffer that limitation. If pressure forced the RioWorks board to disappear, I would have serious concerns about the ability of AMD to be able to impact the server market successfully. Let's hope other server motherboards enter the market soon. As it is, it's a big improvement on the launch of Athlon MP, when Tyan was the exclusive launch vendor. If the high launch prices are any indication of demand, these companies will do well selling their wares.
With all that has been highlighted, here are some questions to ponder:
1. Is Tyan now having to "pay the price" for the help it gave to AMD in developing and launching Athlon MP and Opteron?
2. Was Tyan's webmaster asleep at the wheel? Or are there external interests at play that are dictating to Tyan what to do?
3. Is Tyan making a silent appeal for regulatory help? We all know what would happen to Tyan if such an appeal was made public.
4. Are we now seeing a repeat of actions that caused the FTC to charge Intel for allegedly cutting off customers and competitors in order to stifle competition and impede innovation? If this is so, is it now time for the FTC to investigate Intel again?
theinquirer.net |
