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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (77467)	3/30/1999 5:51:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Respond to of 186894

Ten - IBM & Intel Break off I/O Discussions This may be pertinent to you or your division. Paul {========================} Intel, IBM break off I/O talks By Rick Boyd-Merritt, EE Times Mar 30, 1999 (12:45 PM) URL: eetimes.com SANTA CLARA, Calif. — Representatives from Intel Corp. and IBM Corp. have broken off talks aimed at ending a dispute over interconnect technology for future PC servers. As a result, the Next-Generation I/O Forum, which is backed by Intel, and the Future I/O group, which is supported by IBM, Compaq Computer Corp. and Hewlett-Packard Co., are moving ahead with incompatible approaches to linking high-end systems and peripherals. "At the moment the discussions are off," said Gary Abbott, a founding member of the NGIO Forum, from Dell Computer Corp. (Round Rock, Texas). "In the end a single standard probably does need to exist, but we may have to let the marketplace battle that out for awhile." The NGIO group has released a draft specification for a 2.5-Gbit/second channel I/O architecture to its members. The group hopes to implement the scheme in servers that will ship late next year using Intel's Foster 32-bit processor. For its part, the Future I/O group has said it aims to have an I/O specification available late this year that it expects to see used in servers that would ship in 2001, possibly targeting Intel's 64-bit McKinley processor, a successor to the Merced chip. Both groups were in close discussions and had made mutual concessions as recently as last month, but hit insurmountable sticking points as the negotiations proceeded. Both groups had established independent organizations to develop their technologies and both were based on a one-company, one-vote rule. And the NGIO Forum had indicated its willingness to let members recoup modest royalties on its architecture, a requirement for the Future I/O camp. However, the NGIO group balked at suggestions the two camps should combine and start afresh to tackle the problem. Future I/O representatives said "they would prefer to start from scratch and create a new spec," said Tom Macdonald, a general manager at the server group of Intel (Hillsboro, Ore.) and a leader of the negotiations for the NGIO Forum. "But their schedule is a year behind ours. And the reality is it could take two years or more to work out a fresh approach, and I don't think the market should have to wait." For its part, the Future I/O group has expressed concern that the migration to a new I/O architecture should be a gradual one from today's PCI. Specifically, Compaq, IBM and HP collaborated to develop PCI-X, a version of PCI that can run at speeds up to 132 MHz. They plan to roll out the first servers to implement PCI-X later this year.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (77467)	3/30/1999 9:07:00 PM
From: Paul Fiondella	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Actually it is the same guy that found the Microsoft embedded ID and broke that news to the world that is now responsible for using that embedded ID to track down the perp. He was the one who complained to Microsoft about it. The irony is that they will not find the guy since the embedded id is unlikely to be traceable to a real person AND this guy got his Microsoft OS upgrade. So the very system that was meant to keep Microsoft's software out of the hands of thieves is fooled by the thieves into damaging Microsoft and getting free software. The only security system that will ultimately work on the net is not one that relies upon embedded IDs but one which uses a secure digital identity stored in an identity vault --- Novell's digitalme. If you put your identity into the vault you have to be verifiable at the vault. That means the vault must know who you are. You have to be real to get a digital id. The world however doesn't get that verification information so noone can masquerade as you. Much of this hacking would disappear if digitalme became a standard because no web site would allow a person in that did not have a verifiable digitalme id.