Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Compaq -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James Connolly who wrote (67100)	8/29/1999 12:22:00 PM
From: rudedog	Respond to of 97611

James - Well I guess that clears up the question of who pulled the plug on 64 bit Alpha products, and also whether there is still an NT64 program. This is a pretty frank communication, and they didn't wait 2 weeks to get it out. I hope this is indicative of the new compaq style - respond clearly, accurately and quickly to confusion in the marketplace.

To: James Connolly who wrote (67100)	8/29/1999 10:10:00 PM
From: paul	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 97611

"..After a series of articles we wrote in the last ten days, Jim Boak, the director of Compaq?s Corporate Technical Strategy in the US, has written us an email outlining his company?s position. The full text is below. " Jim...Dance Baby, Dance.!

To: James Connolly who wrote (67100)	8/30/1999 2:08:00 AM
From: axp	Respond to of 97611

This Alpha NT thing is becoming a PR disaster. Why are Compaq execs responding with email to internet rumour mills instead of issuing a press release? Why don't they post a statement about what's happening on their web page? In addition to that, this letter just seems like more fudging of the facts. While I don't really care about the low-sales 32-bit Alpha NT, I don't understand why Compaq is abandoning 64-bit Alpha NT where they have a huge lead on the competition. >First - your article "How Microsoft hedged its 64-bit Alpha >NT bets" is factually correct about the timing of the web >page updates, but the reason for the conflicting positions >was just timing of updates. As reported by Joe Wilcox on >CNET, Compaq was in Redmond on the 25th, informing Microsoft >of our decision not to support productization of the 64 bit >Windows products on Alpha. The version which said these >products would be supported reflected Microsoft's best >knowledge at the start of the day. Those stating that >support would stop with NT4 SP6 reflected the updated >position we provided them on the 25th. Simple but not a >very sexy story. Hard to believe it was this simple. Based on earlier news, Compaq fired the engineers at DECwest in Bellevue on Thursday, August 19. It's inconceivable that MS didn't interpret this correctly in terms of it's implications or that it took almost a week for Compaq to clarify that it also intended to cancel 64-bit Alpha NT. It's more likely both companies hoped the story would just be ignored if they didn't say anything. Then when it leaked to the internet the initial posting were just wrong. Compaq could have avoided this confusion with a clear statment of their intention. >If current schedules hold, we may begin to see >production-quality IA64 systems in 2000 That's a big if since the schedules have slipped by more than a year already. >But in the near term, and for a while to come, the primary >development platform for this 64 bit work will continue to >be Alpha. i.e. Developers won't see usable IA64 boxes for a long time. Alpha machines are available today. >In addition, the availability of mature compilers and 64 bit >applications such as the next generation Microsoft SQL >products will help to rapidly verify design concepts and >performance characteristics which continue to make Alpha a >valuable development platform. i.e. There are no mature compilers for IA64. Alpha compilers are mature and proven. >Compaq has no intention of reducing the number of people or >the level of hardware and infrastructure support we provide >to Microsoft for this effort. This doesn't make sense given the DECwest layoffs. >We intend to increase our investment in this development as >the product moves closer to completion and the number of >linked efforts, such as related Microsoft and third-party >products, increases. 64-bit NT must be so far off Compaq thinks it has time to hire and train a new crop of NT-knowledgable engineers when they are needed. >The 64 bit version is built on the Windows2000 codeline, and >only those components which are 64-bit sensitive are unique >to the 64 bit version. He previously said the 64-bit Alpha/IA64 codeline was different than the 32-bit codeline. Here he says the 64-bit codeline is same as the the 32-bit codeline (presumably compiled with a 64-bit compiler). So which way is it? >Our benefit is in the in-depth understanding of the >operating system, which translates into better integrated >products for our customers and ISV partners and faster time >to market for our platforms. This doesn't make sense given the DECwest layoffs since those were the engineers that had the in-depth understanding of the OS. Also, how does one get faster time to market by switching from a mature chip with mature compilers to a new chip running a new architecture and new compilers? 64-bit NT is clearly going to target the enterprise market and they are generally conservative about new technology and not likely to jump into something that's all new and unproven from the silicon on up. >The notion that Compaq surprised Microsoft, and that >Microsoft retaliated with its product announcements, is just >silly, although it plays to the current soap-opera >atmosphere in the press. Microsoft made product roadmap >adjustments necessitated by Compaq's product decisions, >nothing more. Not so silly considering Microsoft has already shipped Windows 2000 release candidate 1 to it's test sites. Why go to all this work for a product they knew wasn't going to ship? >I described the development environment and plans in some >detail above ? but I guess I need to reinforce the fact >that there has been NO CHANGE in the development plan, >strategy, methodology or resourcing for 64 bit Windows. >None. The only change we anticipate in the future is that >we may have freed up some resources which can now be devoted >to accelerating the schedules or enhancing the product. This doesn't make sense given the DECwest layoffs. You can't devote resources you don't have anymore. In addition, any speedup in schedules benefits all 64-bit platforms, including Compaq's competitors. There's no differentiating benefit for Compaq here unless there's some deals being made that aren't being publicized. >The Compaq engineers have not left off - Compaq will >continue to provide the same or greater support than in the >past. This doesn't make sense given the DECwest layoffs. Which engineers is he talking about?