|
THE NEWS THAT Intel is backing Sun's Solaris, and in return Sun
will use Xeon processors in some of its boxes just underlines how the
industry has changed in the space of a year.
During that period, Dell started using AMD chips, Apple started using
Intel chips and perhaps more significantly the leadership at Sun
Microsystems changed - with Scott McNealy ceding his consistently
anti-Wintel position to Jonathan Schwartz.
THE NEWS THAT Intel is backing Sun's Solaris, and in return Sun
will use Xeon processors in some of its boxes just underlines how the
industry has changed in the space of a year.
During that period, Dell started using AMD chips, Apple started using
Intel chips and perhaps more significantly the leadership at Sun
Microsystems changed - with Scott McNealy ceding his consistently
anti-Wintel position to Jonathan Schwartz.
There are some new realities in the X86 business. The rise and rise of
AMD's Opteron forced Intel to re-assess its microprocessor plans over
two years ago. The guys who run servers at big businesses and
corporations were the pull factor in the adoption of the Opterons but
it could be argued that AMD itself failed to take advantage of the 18
month to two year lead it had over Intel on the server front.
Intel has always had many advantages over AMD - principally in terms of
financial and manufacturing clout - when you're building fabs, the two
are practically synonymous. While AMD is only now building up its 65
nanometre products, Intel declared just a week ago that it was ready to
make chips at 45 nanometres. Some argue that there will be way too much
capacity when three 12-inch fabs producing 45 nanometre chips come
online during next year, but sheer volume is not the only consideration
here. Technology is the force that drew big business to the Opteron and
that remains true for 2007 and 2008. While it's likely that AMD's
products will be able to once again compete successfully with Intel in
Q3/Q4 this year, nothing stands still in the CPU business.
Intel also has the clout to strike big deals with Sun, especially so
now that McNealy's influence has waned. We can safely forget the RISC
versus CISC wars now - Intel told us as long back as 1991 that it
wanted the workstation market and it wanted to take it from Sun. We
won't mention the Itanic much here - that doesn't seem in the slightest
bit relevant to any Sun-Intel discussion any more.
 What
AMD has successfully done is to provide a meaningful alternative for
the tier one vendors in terms of providing a second supplier which
allows them to bargain with Intel more effectively. It could be said
that in this process the chief sacrificial victim for AMD is its once
powerful relationship with the distributor and re-seller channel. But
gone are the days of Intel Inside, provided AMD can play catchup fast
and once more provide some compelling technology to give Chipzilla a
run for the money.
We do not yet know the terms and conditions of the Sun-Intel deal to be
announced, and we may never know them. But AMD must be wondering how
much the deal will affect its relationship with Sun over the next 12
months. The problem for both Intel and AMD is that the tier one vendors
now have choice, and barring a catastrophe for the CPU manufacturers,
that puts the cart where it should be, behind the microprocessor
workhorse. ยต
Read the original article: http://uk.theinquirer.net/?article=37107
|
Get Informed 
