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 : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (18668)	4/21/1998 2:16:00 AM
From: Keith Hankin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

I'd really like to hear what others think about this argument, especially on the technical issue of whether Intel has the ability to write and effectively distribute an OS to go with its microprocessors, and, if so, on the historical/economic issue whether there are any circumstances in which Intel would actually do such a thing. More likely it will continue to license from 3rd parties, with more non-MSFT vendors in the fray. Look for them licensing some sort of lightweight, realtime OS on which to run Java for non-PC computing hardware such as the embedded market, PDAs, set-top boxes, and NCs.

To: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (18668)	4/21/1998 2:47:00 AM
From: Keith Hankin	Respond to of 24154

Microsoft: Unix powerhouse? - SunWorld - April 1998 sun.com

To: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (18668)	4/21/1998 3:04:00 AM
From: Bearded One	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

The issue is more complicated than whether or not someone can write an Operating System for the Pentium. Intel certainly could write a new operating system. Or, they could just take Linux (the Unix that runs on PC's), add a bunch of stuff to it, and push that. To succeed, an operating system needs applications which run on it. Microsoft controls the PC applications market. Will a version of Excel, Outlook, Word, Money, SQL Server, etc.. ever run on anything but Windows? No. Will Compaq or Dell sell PC's with Linux on it? Or any OS that Intel might push? The way the PC market seems to be, Compaq and Dell would be too afraid of incurring Microsoft's wrath to do that. After all, Dell doesn't put the most popular software application of all time (Netscape Navigator) on their PC's. Basically, I think Intel's power in the market isn't such that they could just arbitrarily come out with a new OS. What they could do is tune their chips to run Linux or Java better-- basically aid already competing OS's indirectly. But it won't be very much help.

To: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (18668)	4/21/1998 7:56:00 AM
From: Thure Meyer	Respond to of 24154

"I'd really like to hear what others think about this argument, especially on the technical issue of whether Intel has the ability to write and effectively distribute an OS to go with its microprocessors, and, if so, on the historical/economic issue whether there are any circumstances in which Intel would actually do such a thing." Intel has a number of in-house operating systems that are also used in embedded processing. They also have circuit emulation tools, complex routing software and are proficient in parallel processing software. I don't think their technical ability is the issue. Even if it were, they could immediately partner with any number of real-time OS vendors that already have working products. My belief is that if Intel were to compete with MS and try to leverage their microprocessor by somehow making it incompatible (lets say by not publishing the instruction set, assembler, etc.) with further releases of NT, they would quickly go out of business. 1 - It would take less time to port NT and Windows to another instruction set (perhaps PowerPC or MIPS) and other chip sets already exist for full PC functionality (Apple already does this). 2 - Intel will be unable to duplicate the application set in time and most importantly will not be able to generate critical mass. Excel, Word, etc. will remain de-facto standards for some time. 3 - Other ravenous competitors (e.g., IBM, Motorola) would welcome a move to another chip set and help MS. The bottom line I think is that you could exchange the chips a lot faster than the software and Intel would be committing suicide. Thure

To: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (18668)	4/21/1998 8:35:00 AM
From: Thure Meyer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

An addendum to the previous... I think what this highlights is the fundamental importance of software in CS. In fact my view is that programs and the ability to store data are the key features, not the hardware. Also, if you look at computing history, you will find that all significant instruction set advances were triggered by data processing requirements. Microsoft is in a unique position, they can exert downward, lateral and upward pressure on chip manufactures, component integrators and of course software developers. To the point in fact where MS is also encroaching in Media and telecommunications in general. None of that depends on hardware anymore since most people probably don't care what is inside the machine. Thure

To: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (18668)	4/21/1998 9:37:00 AM
From: Reginald Middleton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Like you said, I'll bite. <For starters, Intel is probably the one company on the face of the planet with the market position and resources to compete effectively against Microsoft in the OS market. It controls the platform to which Microsoft has to write Windows, and its control of the distribution of PC processors provides an ideal position it could leverage to distribute an OS which competes with Windows.> Significant barriers to entry still exist for INTC. The cost of development is one, but that pales to the cost of repercussion for development. If MSFT were to retaliate by licensing or purchasing Power PC technology and selling it as an adjunct to thier core businesses, INTC's would be hurt much more than MSFT. Whose cost structure is more flexible? Industry leaders would(should?) fuel this fight for the fracture in the Wintel monopoly means oppurtunity. <The pieces to the puzzle I do not have are: (1) whether Intel has the technical ability to write an OS within a reasonable amount of time in order to compete with Microsoft. Obviously, there are different levels of software language, ranging from assembly language to C++. But is writing the code that goes on the microprocessors that Intel already sells a part of that continuum?> Intel would most likely purchase a code base to start with. My favorite, which I mentioned before, OS/2. It runs nealry all Win 16 apps and some Win 32 Apps, is as stable is NT and is already configured for client/server environments. INTC has the cash, and if they can polish the program up in time and sell it at marginal profits, they would drive the OS market down to that of commodity status. They would also end up in court. Imagine, bundling a 32 bit NT capable server OS with a 600MHz PII for $800. MSFT, Sunw, the whole business model of the industry would shift dramatically. <Second, if it's obvious enough a theory for me to figure out, then DOJ's got covered for sure.> I wouldn't bet the house on that. I am still reeling form the fact that the DOJ didn't even bother to see if IE and Winows were truly separable before they bothered to file a motion to the contrary. After that stunt, anything is possible.