Barry,
> if I were IBM, I would realize that my CPU choices amounted to
> controlling my own destiny or having them controlled, largely, by
> Intel, and, in this hypothetical scenario, I would be inclined
> towards controlling my own destiny.
The thing is, IBM doesn't see it that way.
Their current strategy is to make the hardware platform relatively unimportant, and to focus on providing SYSTEMS which can run across hardware platforms, leveraging the net and Java.
This, I think is very prudent for them, and a more realistic risk for Intel. It leverages IBMs strengths in the systems business, decreases the dependence on an ANY single architecture, increases the usefulness of their own high-powered machines, and avoids trying to compete with Intel or Microsoft on their own terms.
The simple fact is that nobody has ever beat Intel by competing on Intel's terms. IBM might be more capable of doing this than anybody else, but it's very risky and it involves betting on an architecture which Intel is going to make obsolete with Merced. So IBM is looking for a completely new paradigm in which to compete. Interestingly, both companies could turn out to be winners.
mg |
