Open Architecture
From the PII forum
newsgroups.intel.com
From "PDI"
Date Sent Fri, 6 Mar 1998 13:09:26 -0800
So if I understand your review correctly, Intel has defined the bus speed at 66 or 100, and has removed all possibility for motherboard manufacturers and OEMs to do anything else with it. Sounds like maybe a prelude to an attempt to block any Cyrix/National or other Slot 1 implementation using this chipset, other than what Intel dictates.
I guess the old sayings are true, some people never learn from their
mistakes and some do not have the ability to learn from history. The more that Intel does to establish a proprietary design to block the competition, the more trouble they are going to have selling their products. IBM tried it with the microchannel bus in their PS/2 systems and Apple has been there with the MAC (a totally closed architecture), The difference between these two, IBM awoke to the fact that the market wants an open architecture and Apple still hasn't realized this. The result, IBM rebounded and Apple is still sinking.
In fact, Apple established the first open architecture standard with the Apple II, and when they realized that others were innovating and profiting from this openness, they slammed the door shut with the MAC in a moment of greed, that has cost them their onetime leadership in this market. At least when IBM walked down this very same path, they eventually were willing to admit they made a mistake and changed direction back to a much more open architecture.
Please, no IBM or Apple comments, I am merely stating well published facts, as a comparison and example.
Intel has failed to honor this historical basis for the PCs success. The truly open architecture of the original IBM-PC did more to establish a standard, did more to establish a following, did more to establish competitive pricing, etc. than any other single computer related innovation in the history of the computer. The PC market of today demands these levels of compatability, interoperatbility, interchangability, reliability, and competitive pricing from all manufacturers.
From the date of the first first personal computer, nothing has succeeded like the open architecture model and nothing has failed worse than attempts to close that architecture down to the benefit of a single manufacturer.
If your description of this limitation is correct, then with this new
chipset, Intel is removing one more option from the motherboard vendors and limiting the systems overall potential in a way that will stifle competition, innovation and competitive pricing.
lattin96 wrote in message <35016C3C.A089EC35@infoave.net>...
>Hi... i have just posted my article on intels bx chipset and there
>upcomeing cpu's katmai,Williamette,merced
> if you want to read about them visit my site at
>http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Horizon/5693/
> the bx chipset is due for release on April 15th see what it means to
>you
> Thomas
> |
