Here is a post from AOL CPQ board.
Here's a copy of the Intel-Compaq merger article (an opinion) in PC Magazine:
April 7, 1998
The Real Merger: Compaq and Intel
By John C. Dvorak
The computer industry is heading toward the inevitable merger of Compaq and Intel. What leads me to this obvious conclusion is the fact that after a dubious lawsuit, the Alpha chip was transferred to Intel right before Compaq's recent buyout of Digital. I see all of this as being triggered by the recent stagnation in innovation that has resulted from the (near) death of the Apple Mac. Hear me out on this one; it's a beaut.
Apple gave the PC business its last big boost with the introduction of the mouse and GUI. When Apple innovation stopped recently, we began to see an industry implode to regain true leadership. Over the ten years since the Mac was introduced, Microsoft engineers continued to take Apple's best ideas to produce a Mac "for the rest of us." And we have to thank them for all those good ideas, but underlying these ideas were hardware innovations: Windows
wouldn't even work if it weren't for graphics accelerators. Microsoft is always accused of being a copycat, but, in its defense, it can't lead in new directions if those new directions have to be guided by hardware ideas. Microsoft makes hardware only when it has to. It developed the old EGA card to move people toward the GUI model, and it had to market a mouse to get people to use one.
The next step in the Mac age of computing was supposed to be integrated voice and video. There were designs to put a camera and microphone into the monitor cabinet. Only the microphone ever appeared, and only on some monitors; the camera never happened. Third-party companies marketed various cameras, but they have not become universal. Video will become standard in computing only when someone makes it a standard feature. This company can only be
Compaq.
Compaq has reluctantly emerged as the industry leader, although the company's history has always been one of profound leadership. Its inaugural computer was the first portable IBM clone. It pioneered laptops. When the market was trying to make the transition from the Intel 286 during the PC AT era, the bets within Intel and elsewhere were on RISC; the 860 was a candidate. Without thinking twice, Compaq took the 386 chip and single-handedly moved the
entire industry in that direction. It then, with others, promoted the EISA bus over the IBM Micro Channel, effectively killing the Micro Channel. More recently, Compaq has blown the industry into a new direction by pioneering the sub-$1,000 computer. The only serious flopperoo Compaq has had was its printer line. The fact is, Compaq is the leader--whether it likes the idea or not. But Compaq can't grow forever if there is only a single source for its
parts. It can't live long on a few Cyrix MediaGX chips and AMD's production glitches. AMD's recent stumble in producing enough K6 chips to meet demand was the final nail in this merger coffin. Compaq has to merge with Intel.
A Compaq/Intel merger would create one monster computer company that would really compete with IBM and the world. As part of the three-way merger, the Alpha chip had to be handed over to Intel because Compaq didn't want even momentary responsibility for the chip, knowing full well that the real merger--itself with Intel--would still be coming. And if the Compaq/Intel merger falls through or has a bumpy road, at least Compaq knows it can get chips
without running a fab. This also means that the Alpha is far from dead. Let's face it, both the Alpha handover and the Compaq/ Digital merger were out of the blue and obviously part of a bigger scheme.
Intel needs to find a way to lock things up permanently. And the best way to guarantee that its chips will be used is to own the largest PC maker in the world. Furthermore, my arguments about video everywhere fit right into the Intel strategy. Intel has been an early booster and would love to take its leadership to the next level, which it cannot do if it's always in the background. The merger would also put pressure on Microsoft to do the bidding of
the mega-company, rather than the tail wagging the dog, as has been the case. Andy Grove, in particular, would like to see a kinder, gentler, more submissive Bill Gates. The new company would have the resources to create a new operating system, fine-tune it to a next-generation chip, and foist it on the public--cutting Bill out of the picture. Intel sees IBM as bumbling fools for not doing this already.
End.
Good luck to all! |
