Microsoft Making Internet Appliance Chips 140
M$ Mole writes: "According to CNN, Microsoft is now developing their own chips for WebTV and other new internet appliances. The article is lacking in terms of technical details of the chips, but does bring up a good question of: What does this do to the Wintel relationship?" The idea of Microsoft making chips will raise a lot of eyebrows ceiling high, but it sounds like a fairly modest endeavor thus far, not MS jumping into the ring with AMD, Motorola, Intel, or even with the smaller X86 makers. As M$ Mole and the article say, it's about chips for appliances -- for now.
The Microsoft Toaster (Score:2)
Oh wait...you said "internet appliance"!
Re:Making your own chip (Score:1)
Vision of the 21st Century: Vanity Chips.
--
Hardware & Software in Control (Score:1)
First: they steal the code and call it their OS;
Second: they steal another idea and call it their GUI;
Third: they steal some more code and call it their browser;
Fourth: they pick up on an idea and call it their internet;
Fifth: they buy all kinds of software-companies and call it their 'innovations';
Sixth: they bully/squeeze/sue all rivals from the market and call it their extend & embrace policy for your good;
Seventh: they FUD and spam on other products and call it their idea of a "Good Thing" (TM);
Eighth: they seek "World Domination"(TM) and call it their idea;
etc. etc. etc.
Now that they have come up with the "innovation" to start on hardware as well as software they (and their peers like Sony, MPAA, etc. etc. etc.) can really start to overtake the majority of business and home computing.
With the control over hardware and software they can sell 'blocking/filtering/firewall' services to companies that for example want to kill, crush and destroy the rights of the "consumer" like they are trying now with the DMCA, Napster, et al.
Is it me or does Steve B. look like "The Man"(TM) on the screen in the movie "1984" ?
NOW is the time we should be worried. After all, Linux still has a minor percentage of desktop presence and WINxyz is by far the most pushed/shoved/pre-installed software.
Does anyone have a clue how to prevent the "1984" scenario coming to *y*o*u*r* office and home? There is much animosity here on
What I want to know is: How do we stop them and what is being done already ?
Living in Europe does free me of some U.S.of A. issues, but the ramifications are obvious to us all the same. Some legislation may cross the Atlantic and contaminate our rights as well!
{squawk} Polly want a Cookie!
---
It's actually good news... (Score:2)
Re:Networked Appliances (Score:1)
Lots of this is solvable with current technology, for pretty reasonable amounts of money.
MP3 Player? This is just a PC. You can pick up a P150 system for next to nothing. Alarm clock/radio? Same box. The problem is that the output device gets kind of expensive (IE, flat panel.) So there's definitely some work that needs to be done there.
As for house controls, all of this can be handled via X10, which is fairly inexpensive. Lights, Heat, AC, Blinds, Appliances, et cetera; All X10 controllable. A starter X10 kit will run you between $6 and $25 for a remote, a serial port widget, a transceiver module with appliance control, and a light dimmer module.
The car is really the tricky part. This is something I've been thinking about for some time, though. The problem is that I don't think that there really exists a good backlit daylight viewable color screen. All the rest of it's pretty trivial.
Your friend already had the door with intercom tied into his computer, so obviously this can be done reasonably well.
Re:Networked Appliances (Score:1)
anyway I was looking into getting some X10 stuff for when we go on holiday, so the inlaws don't have to come over and draw the curtains all the time. The protocol is really only designed for use with a remote control, or a switch, where you are present at the time. There is no way of checking that your commands are correctly received by a device, or querying the state of a device. One burst of noise over your mains when your PC is trying to shut the curtains, and for the rest of your holiday the curtains will be shut all day and open at night ;) Or something like that.
If I could find devices using a better protocol with some ACKs and NACKs in there somewhere, I'd be a lot happier about internetting my house with them. In particular I _really_ want to be emailed when my burglar alarm goes off so I can have a look at my house web cam and if necessary phone the police. I also want central locking for my house, including my shed and my back gate. And I want to be able to turn on my oven when I'm leaving work.
$ cat houselog
24.8.00
07:00 Preprogrammed request
Curtains open
11:23 Movement detected at front gate
Gardencam on
Radio on
11:24 Doorbell rung
HARRI alerted
20:43 Dusk detected
Curtains shut, lights on
21:00 Preprogrammed request
Hot water on, oven on, front door light on
21:15 Householder return
House to manual control
$
NT for EDA tools? (Score:1)
It would be a nice coup for Solaris/HP/Linux if it came out that M$ used something else for their own chip design.
Re:what about sun? (Score:1)
SUN / IBM etc. are hanging in there, some even doing quite well as the need for servers has grown exponentially and they can sell reliable scalable solutions. But even in IBMs case we pay MS to put there software on our machines to sell, but used to compete (OS2) It will be interesting to see how MS does in the enterprise.
The only ones who have beeten MS are Palm and AOL. But notice that MS never gives up and MSN and new versions of CE are here..
Windows NT used to be called windows Nice Try, now its still sucks but its much better.
Re:Sounds a lot like Sun Java chips (Score:1)
As technology gets more advanced, simple technology gets cheaper. At some point, your microwave will have a Pentium-class CPU in it, because it will be cheaper than custom logic. So at some point, your washing machine may run linux, with applications developed in java (or some successor to it... chai, anyone?) just because it's easier that way, and people are used to it.
Re:MS decision making flowchart (Score:1)
> A:I guess so. We have nothing to loose.
The evil empire drops a silicon curtain between
its customers and the free world. They control
the TV content, they control the net access,
they sanitize the mail and mediate transactions.
It's for your own good. Dissent is treason.
News: Microsoft announces new Innovation: Wheel (Score:2)
Industry observers had this to say: "Once they get this thing rolling, everything will go downhill rapidly." Expected to be another proprietary product of the software giant, it's an unusual venture into the field of hardware. "This will demonstrate our engineering prowess," said another club-toting anonymous source, clad in a bearskin.
Others claim this has already been done long ago and that there are already existing ways to produce this same item, many of which are free. Company President and CEO, Steve Ballmer had this to say, "Ugh, wheel good! Ugh, innovation!"
On slashdot.org an extremely embarassing corporate profile was linked [microsoft.com], detailing how Microsoft was again late to the table with dirty hands. When questioned on this, Ballmer replied, "Oot!"
Vote [dragonswest.com] Naked 2000
Hmmm lets see (Score:2)
Not much detail (Score:1)
planning to make. I think whether this impacts
their relationship with Intel will depend a lot
on the features these chips have.
It seems more than unlikely that someone without
their own manufacturing plants would consider
to go into the processor business - you need
to be very close to the technology. Transmeta
seems to be the only exception, and it's not
like they are shipping vast numbers.
Microsoft would have enough money to get into
this market, but it would be a major effort.
Designing some chips e.g. for TCP/IP routing and
the like is a completely different matter.
That wouldn't impact their relationship with Intel
either.
Of course no chips have actually been made yet,
and knowing Microsoft there is no guarantee
they will ever be made.
worst thing ever (Score:2)
An appliance from microsoft would be one of the most frightening things I can think of. Right out of some b-movie horror. Maybe it will secretly print ads folded into paper airplanes and shoot them across the house. Or maybe oscillating voltage drains to destroy non-MS-complaint appliances on the same circuit. I can just imagine a microwave with ad banners, that only works if you took the fridge from an MS refrigerator of the same generation.
Okay, I know they really mean web appliances, not household appliances (YET!) but that's scary too. The only reason to use such a thing (unless it's really cheap) is for the increased reliability and decreased maintenance of a wellbuilt firmware solution - and if there is anything MS can't do well it's firmware.
The really, really evil thing about MS is that everyone in the world now expects computers to not just be usually somewhat confusing, but also to be unpredictable irrational and unstable. Having to reboot all the time makes people hate computers, and is constantly increasing the ranks of the technophobes, when computers have been swift enough for quite a while now that they shouldn't have this kind of problem!
*sigh*
*sigh*
Great... (Score:1)
Custom chips make costs less: nothing to see here (Score:1)
Less interconnects, lower price.
Plus, if they are going to make the X box, why not make production mistakes on the webTV box? This is a learning experience for them, and they will need all the learning they can get before they start making X boxes.
I don't see it as scary. Bill wants to make the weTV hardware as cheap as they can.
Alas, I can't find the links, but 2 years ago there was limited press about a (polish? chech?) firm that was partnered with Microsoft and the wording of the press release was that M$ was actually BRANDING the hardware...yes you got a Microsoft computer, instead of a Dell/HP/Compaq/whatever box that had Microsoft on it. Perhaps someone that knows what Micro$oft is doing outside the US boarders has a link or 2.
I've Been Telling People... (Score:4)
...not to invest in software companies. Why? Two words: Free Software.
Free Software is great for hardware companies. It sucks for most software companies. RedHat will never pull in the dough like MS did.
Now, MS is one of the few software companies with the $$$ and wherewithall to transform intself into a hardware company via initiatives such as this, the X-box, and their various PDA efforts.
A lot of other software companies are just going to go *poof*.
The way of the giant (Score:4)
Lots of companies do this when the cost of assembling a bunch of separate components gets to be too expensive. If you know you have a large market, it is cheaper in the long run to invest in designing a custom chip to perform a single function. It eliminates all the overhead cruft of general purpose computers like the intel architecture. In simple economics terms, this is the easy answer.
For those with a suspicious bent towards anything M$ does, it could be a slap at intel or a first step towards creating a computing platform where competitors can't run. They could be trying to make a system with integrated audio/video streams which will only play a proprietary format which M$ controls, and since the codec is in hardware, no competitor could weasel its way onto the box and steal some content marketshare. Your call.
It'll be interesting if these new boxes turn out like closed architectures, like gaming consoles. Why does that sound like a challenge to figure a way to install Linux?
the AC
MS decision making flowchart (Score:5)
A:Nope. Tried that.
Q:Can we out market Palm?
A:Nope. Tried that.
Q:Can we lock in users on the apps level?
A:Nope. Tried that.
Q:Can we lock in users on the OS level?
A:Nope Tried that.
Q:Can we lock in users on the hardware level?
A:I guess so. We have nothing to loose.
Q:How about giving the customer a better product?
A:Blank stare . . . [laughter]
Re:Jeez. (Score:2)
I just wonder.... (Score:1)
Re:Not much detail (Score:1)
Yes if you had a fab plant, that would be feasible. And yes you can design *a* CPU, that's actually rather trivial, but that's not a CPU which could compete with Intel. To compete with these guys you need to design a 1 GHz CPU and manufacture it, too. The design, well they may be able to pull that of, but manufacturing? There are only a handful people who could do that. They'd need an alliance with one of those - just like Transmeta.
Hardware failure... (Score:2)
Re:Networked Appliances (Score:1)
I agree that X10 is not an ideal system. Ideally you would have something where all the devices could in fact talk back to you and let you know what was going on. Any request would then be followed up for a request for state. If the state was incorrect, it would retry some number of times...
However, a burst of noise won't make it act weird, most likely; It should just make it not act at all. And since X10's signals are fairly long/slow/wide (take your pick of terminology) the odds are that any noise on the power line will not affect your X10 signal.
Re:Monopoly (Score:1)
Dude, what the HELL are you talking about? Are you tanked? I'm assuming you mean the Sony Playstation or Playstation 2, neither of which run anything like Windows... and if not, WTF is a "sonystation?"
So... (Score:1)
Your Microsoft{tm} Motherboard has detected a virus attempting to load itself into system memory. The process in question, Red_Hat_Linux_v6.2, will be terminated immediately.
If you have any information which could be useful to Microsoft in its attempt to sue the individual or individuals responsible for distribution of this virus, such as the name of a store not complying with the Microsoft's voluntary "WIN-only or Die" sales promotion, please contact us immediately by sending email to theman@microsoft.com
88
important unanswered question (Score:1)
Re:Is this Talisman all over again? (Score:1)
However, the use of impostors is not dead. Elixir's 'Republic' has quite an interesting graphics engine that appears to use impostors quite convincingly. I'm less convinced that it'll have any decent gameplay, though...
More at SJ Mercury site (Score:4)
You got it all wrong. (Score:4)
That would be... potato chips.
Solo2? I wonder... (Score:1)
But unlike the desktop, the embedded chip market has never been Intel's private playground. Embedded is much more wide open. Microsoft won't own it either.
Microsoft will either not make much money on the chips but sell some boxes, or else make good money on the chips but not sell many boxes because the price is too high for them to be competitive.
Also, Microsoft will either spend a lot of money to get slightly different functionality than existing chips, or they will spend a lot of money to get just the same functionality as existing chips. Either way, they will probably decide in the end that it wasn't worth it. (Don't bet your career on this chip.)
By the way, any word on what instruction set it will run?
AC because I'm lazy...
Wondering (Score:2)
Depending on the exact nature of the chip many companies choose PalmOS ( a good, small, low-power OS), a few companies choose WinCE (or whatever that waste of bytes is called now), many (or at least some) companies choose to create a Linux-derivative, and many create a new OS (which usually fails).
To me this symbolizes the place where a court-ordered break-up would actually help Microsoft. If the chip making part of the company was not tied to the OS making part they would be free to choose any of the above solutions. But as it currently is they could only choose one (and it is not a good one).
I've always felt that Microsoft made very good hardware. Whenever I rant about their faults it is only in relation to the software, if it were to become possible to seperate the company into 3 (MicrOS, Microsoft, and Microhard, Look I even gave them names all of the hard work is done) then we could get some good products and a seperate crappy OS.
Devil Ducky
Okay, I have to nitpick (Score:1)
Check out the register. (Score:3)
Particularly, a couple of quotes from Intel about this:
- Ron Smith, a senior VP at Intel's wireless division in Santa Clara
-
"I have no problem competing with Microsoft."
This may also answer Hemos' question [slashdot.org], about why is Intel demoing Linux failover.- Mark Christiansen, Intel's senior VP in charge of its IXA project
You sell chips: we push other operating systems.
Chips? (Score:2)
Re:Not much detail (Score:1)
Is this Talisman all over again? (Score:5)
Trying to spank Transmeta??? (Score:2)
I know it sounds petty, but are they trying to force out Transmeta, seeing as how Crusoe is supposed to be focusing on low-power applications like laptops and internet appliances?
Re:I've Been Telling People... (Score:1)
Well, free software can be just as bad for the hardware companies. GNU/Linux running on top of an Alpha or a PowerPPC looks much the same as GNU/Linux running on top of an x86. It's pretty easy to port things once the compiler is done. That makes it a commodity market for chips too.
Dangerous situation (Score:1)
MS toilet (Score:1)
Plumbing stuff is so easy to thwart. Need a real shower? Buy a crapy water saver model and drill out the water saver, usually made of brass or plastic and can be drilled by hand if need be. Your shower will no longer resemble a mister or a girl urinating on you, and you will become clean. As for tanks, how hard could it be to build a bigger box?
The microsoft model, however will be ten times bigger, three times slower, and their chip will burn 80 watts. The extra gizmos include:a message box that flashes every time you put in a non-MS toilet paper, "Warning, Non MS TP 0x240:0a, will not flush properly", a seat that always opens with MSIE 5.0, and a music system that only plays wav files. Hell may freeze over before it finishes, but it will keep you warm in winter!
Re:I've Been Telling People... (Score:1)
The ASP idea isn't exactly new. We've been leasing our Mainframe services for years now. However it's a bit different because it is not a tremendous effort to drop the service, take your tapes and restore them to a new Mainframe leasing company.
The difference was we were just leasing hardware space and ran our own applications and data. Call it a web service provider, I guess in the mainframe vintage.
After all the web is just mainframe with pretty graphics.
Re:Not much detail (Score:2)
Where? (Score:1)
Unless they carve them out of wood - which wouldn't be too surprising - they don't appear to have the talent pool to draw from for design or production.
Re:Good Move (Score:1)
After so many year, it has lost alot of momentum. It just do't matter anymore, now that i-opener is so cheap.
This toaster would self destruct in 5 seconds... (Score:1)
Whats next ? Vibrators with MS chip enabled within ? hmmm...interesting. I dont think they would come in large sizes and I presume they would either self destruct or deflate since they were made by "MICRO" "SOFT"
My two cents..
Networked Appliances (Score:4)
I have ReplayTV. I want it networked so that I can log into it from work and see what's recording, delete stuff I don't want, record shows that I forgot to ask it to record, and such. When I watch TV, I want to be able to call up the IMDB page for the movie I just watched.
I want to have my MP3 player networked.
I want my alarm clock/radio to also play MP3s, so I want it networked.
I would like a lot of my house controls (lights, heat, AC, and such) computerized and networked. So I went on vacation and forgot to turn off the AC? I can log in and stop wasting electricity, and program it to be cool again just before I get home.
I would love to have my car networked. It could search for low gas prices on my intended route when the tank gets low. It could report its location if it gets stolen. Obviously, it could download MP3s for the stereo.
I would like to have my doorbell networked. I have a friend that has a doorbell with an intercom, along with a web cam all computerized. Someone can ring the doorbell when he is at work. He can answer on the intercom and look at the person at the door, making them think he's home but can't come to the door.
Ten years ago most people didn't think they needed their computers networked. All it takes is a little imagination. Sure, the value-add may not be that huge at first, but others will imagine a little more, and soon we'll wonder how we ever got by without having everything online.
Re:Where? (Score:2)
There is no way M$ could produce the silicon in-house; this will be farmed out to an ASIC producer or something.
They could wire a 1Mhz square wave into the HALT line to make it run just like Windows. Heck, just tie it low...
antitrust and monopolies (Score:2)
Since there has already been a court decision that they have a monopoly, they had better be very careful about this sort of thing.
If they have any slight special preferential treatment between their software and hardware, it will almost certainly have disastrous consequences.
---
Despite rumors to the contrary, I am not a turnip.
Don't think this is a troll, but... (Score:1)
They make some nice game controllers too.
I call it "the 3dfx sickness," because IMHO, 3dfx makes some sweet hardware. It just takes them years before the drivers catch up to that hardware. (I got a Voodoo 3 3500, and I'm still waiting...)
* I say "mice" if I'm talking about the creature; the same way I say "virii" if talking about the programs.
A logical move on MS' part (was: WINCE!) (Score:1)
Many companies, expecially various Linux companies, and Be inc. are therefore betting on the IA market, where competition is still possible. "Not so!" (sez Mickeysoft) They want that market, too, and did what I think is obvious: make PROPRIETARY HARDWARE whos specs only MS will know, and therefore, only Windows-supported.
With the $5 billion bribe to AT&T, to sell 5 million WebTVs to their customers (you remember this, right? don't let me dig the url... me lazy) and other similar spins, Mickeysoft is -really serious- about the IA market.
Oh, and just a little rant, please disregard: F*CCCKKKK Mickeysoft!!!!!!
What's totally interesting... (Score:1)
Oh Great (Score:1)
Re:C#, .NET, and more (Score:1)
Re:MS decision making flowchart (Score:1)
I am Gates2K of Borg (Score:2)
Brilliant! (Score:1)
Maybe they'll become rivals for Intel in the Great Vaporware Chip Race (tm).
(please proceed to mod me into the ground. Thanks.)
best time to move in. (Score:1)
Mike
M$ won't stop here... (Score:2)
Also I don't really like the sound of the OS maker manufacturing the processors too: how long will it be until the processors themselves come with a small bit of the windoze/dos code on them in ROM.
"The system has not detected a FAT32 partition on the disk controller. Nice try, sucker. Press any key to retry..."
And we all know how bad M$ is at releasing ANY code to the community. At least with Intel, we get chip specifications for development. I can't see microsoft having those specs in a nice handy .pdf document on their website, do you?
Do what Gillete did when Bic made razors. (Score:1)
Once again (Score:2)
Motorola came out with the MPC821 a few years ago, with LCD driver build in, then the MPC823 with LCD/VGA support on the chip. Plus 10Base and USB ports, a couple of simple serial and I2C And SPI for controlling any peripherals you needed to. Oh, and it could talk to a framer to get T1/E1/ADSL. Not the fastest, at 40-80 MIPS, but maybe enough for settops, toasters, and microwave ovens.
It certainly seems as if this is a attempt to handle both the DoJ and inroads for compeating operating systems. The MS marketing machine certainly will make this impressive to some consumers.
Too bad open source RTOSes such as RTEMS haven't gotten much attention. They beat WinCE hands down, be it memory footprint, performance, or ease of use. And they are true hard real time OSes, not the MS "well, just use a faster processor and maybe it'll be quick enough" sort-of-real-time-OS.
Re:The day the WebTv learned how to fly (Score:1)
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
WebTV has been making chips since the beginning (Score:4)
Since then, they've done many revs. Sure Microsoft bought them several years ago, but designing new chips is not new.
Re:More at SJ Mercury site (Score:1)
Apparently software for PCs hasn't been going very well for them. Couldn't have anything to do with a bad product, could it?
"You'll die up there son, just like I did!" - Abe Simpson
Re:Just what we need. (Or Microsoft makes chip als (Score:1)
WRONG! (Score:1)
As much as I'd like to see M$ once again pour money down another "Bob" rathole, I think the free software guys are going to shoot themselves in the foot on this one.
Instead of blue chip... (Score:1)
Re:Yes! (Score:1)
(I know this is a repost, but this time I bothered to login so y'all could see it).
Named after a dog? (Score:2)
I think not! I bet instead it was Lucas calling up Gates and saying "Hans off!"
--
a better choice: (Score:1)
We're now one step closer... (Score:1)
Dennis
Re:Yes! -- WHAT ABOUT SUN AND (Score:2)
Sun has been designing their own chips since the Sun 3. They have designed a neat new processor (ps. anyone else - it really is neat, check out that link [arstechnica.com]). The MAJC processor is in no way tied to running Java code. It is just a neat way at getting hardware to support multi-threading better.
But let's judge Sun on their history. Look at Sun's history with chip production. Look at the bios they use: OpenFirmware [openfirmware.com]. Look how they have spun control of the sparc architecture off into Sparc International [sparc.com], to make it a truely open platform.
Then look at MicroSoft's track record. Do you doubt that M$ will be trying to gain monopoly control over WebTV devices, in the same way they have captured the desktop market?
I really don't see any point in your comparison.
cheers,
G
Re:Networked Appliances (Score:1)
Overall, nice comments. Dedicated appliances IMO have their place though. I really just consider TIVO to be a dedicated web browser for TV shows. (.. well maybe its a little more than that. ) To me, the concept behind dedicated appliances is for usability.
Perhaps you *can* make a PC that works as a MP3 player, alarm clock, intercom, email, Video recorder AND have it easy to use. But then what happens as more functions come in? Immediately usability is affected. It's impossible to have a universal device that's always easy to use. Or... what happens if your HD crashes? You lose everything.
What the fuck Jose? (Score:2)
I hope people stop developing the Netwinder so no one has to worry about set-top user friendly computers anymore. The last thing we need isa departure from hastily built caseless POS Linux boxes. I don't know what i would do without my space heater often confused for a file server. While we're at killing off simplicty, why the fuck are you still using X, you don't need a GUI you pussy. Web-TV is stupid because it has a Microsoft logo, I hate it with a passion. It really gets your point across when you scold a computer neophyte because they like the Windows Start button and cute sounds when they click things. Kick a puppy while you're at it.
Maybe just maybe (Score:1)
Re:Not much detail (Score:1)
If youre given a team of 50 engineers in a physical and logical design team, unlimited budget, all the tools you need, a lot of time and a fab plant could you design a cpu ? I'd be willing to put a firm bet on yes.
M$ right now has 50 engineers working on a chip with 9 million transistors (equivalent to the PIII). They arent stating what its going to be used for (no relation to the solo 2 in this article which has 2.2 million transistors). since they cranked out a chip with 2.2mil i'm willing to bet they could crank out a cpu. hell, if cyrix, amd, via and transmeta can do it..why not m$ ? and transmeta had fewer people.
This is depressing (Score:4)
How am I gonna crash my Windows box if I can't get it to boot up in the first place?
Re:C#, .NET, and more (Score:2)
Re:Chips? (Score:2)
But I think you can service pack the Intel processors! I think you can flash update Intel processors since the Pentium II, to replace the microcode while the chip is running, to fix bugs or try to add work-arounds any physical defects that might crop up.
There is hope for micros~1 chips yet
cheers,
G
Re: (Score:2)
NSA_KEY (Score:3)
Making your own chip (Score:3)
It's really not a big deal to make your own chip. When I was doing grad school part time several years ago, I made this little chip, together with a small group of other students [pjrc.com]. The whole thing only took a couple months to design. I learned a lot and since then I've had a much better perspective about how ICs are designed, which has been helpful designing at the board level.
The CNN article is remarkable vauge about what Microsoft's chip actually does.... it may be a CPU, or maybe just "glue logic". Whatever it is, it's common to design ASICs for high volume products. Unfortunately, it also common to make a big deal out of nothing.
Since has Rev#1 of any Microsoft product... (Score:2)
Unfortunately, they've followed that pattern so often that everyone begins to quake when MS releases Rev#1, often as not folding then and there. Also unfortunately, devoid of competition, MS doesn't feel as intense a need to get the product up to the Rev#3 stage.
Imagine Microsoft's version of...
- The Pentium FP bug
- The 286 comatose phase-of-the-moon jump bug
- The 286, period
- The 6502 catch-fire-and-burn instruction
The mind boggles.
Is it harder to push buggy hardware into the marketplace than it is buggy software?
Convergence (Score:3)
This is about MS moving out of the computer and into your TV. Not the good ole rabbit-ears TV, not even your cable-hooked-plus-VCR TV but tomorrows TV.
Think Smart-Cable-box + WebTV + Tivo + Digital Download of Media (music, movies, special events) + Games + Network Sharing + Remote Applications + Home Automation + Telephony.
One box that plugs in, from one vendor, with massive name recognition and tons of back-end architecture already in place. All of your couch-potato needs from one source.
So why a custom chip? Control. Now MS can put all of the anti-piracy / media-control / encryption right into the hardware. Optimize the CPU to run MS architecture material. Heck, with WinHEC they've been setting the specs for years now, it's a small jump to just doing it directly.
Microsoft doesn't want to be your OS vendor, or your applications vendor, not even your ISP or cable-company or channel - it wants to be all of them.
Yesterday the MS WebTV, today the MS Phone, tomorrow the MS Information/Entertainment/Shopping system.
Convergence.
Yes! (Score:2)
Why is MS popular? "Compatibility". And when MS creates new technologies, what's the best word to describe the usual result? "Incompatible". So please, MS, dump a lot of money into creating a new chip and software to run on it--it only hastens your demise.
--
But which half? (Score:2)
---
"The Constitution...is not a suicide pact."
C#, .NET, and more (Score:4)
I'd look at this as a means for Microsoft to bypass the hardware market all together. If they can manufacture and market a WebTV box that uses the .NET infrastructure and the C# language as a development environment, they can bypass Intel, Dell, etc. altogether. And, keep those profit margins up.
You may be able to file this in the "set-top box" file, and safely forget it. This is either a really brilliant move, or a feint to keep the wolves at bay.
Microsofts own processors (Score:5)
Made from 99.9% recycled Intel
Well, maybe not, but in accordence with standard embrace, extend, extinguish philosiphy, I would have to say yes.
But my question is (aside from perhaps the stereo and tv) why does anything in my house besides my computer need to be networked? I don't need web access on my toaster, blender, microwave, refridgerator, washer, or dryer. If you can wire up my sink to automatically rinse the dishes and put them in the dishwasher for me, while having my Mindstorm's clear off the table I just ate from, then *maybe* and only maybe, will I feel that its necessary to have my appliances networked.
soon i'll be surfing the web from my toilet paper spindle
Monopoly (Score:2)
Think about the sonystation vs. the MS Xbox. Sony is still paying microsoft for windows while competeing with them in the console space.
Office software suites are another example of this problem. And we all know how well lotus and Borland did vs MS.
Why would you want to write any software knowing that if microsoft decides to release something similar they're going to leverage the OS to run you out of business?
Because about 80-90% of computers still run windows.
If there was a more viable alternative (large market share) I'm sure many companies would write software for them.
Maybe linux someday?
nolonger an monopoly? (Score:2)
MS in the past have created competition to ward off anti-trust is this a way of say "hey we are competitors with Intel AMD IBM are several other companies as well"
so basically they are no longer an monopoly because they entered another market
i know that its all seperated but a judge might be more *understanding* if they are in a market where they dont have an monopoly
or are they asking for more trouble because they are (will) be optimizing their OS to their chip?
-rev
Re:Where? (Score:2)
Which means that everyone these days can make chips on a shoestring. Well, not an Open Source shoestring, but in the scale of corporate financing it's about as expensive to make a chip today as it is to buy a fleet of 10 cars, development costs notwithstanding.
Re:Networked Appliances (Score:2)
Some of what you said I can agree with. The lights, heat, A/C, and doorbell. That's all great, becuase those are stationary things.
As for your TV, why does that need to be a separate device? Can't that just be a big output device from your central computer (or secondary computer for data storage of all your movies/tv/etc.)? I mean, why does that need to be a device with it's own electronics, it's just a screen? Store all your movies and shit on your computer (in your office, basement, wherever), and just have input/output devices wherever you like them. As for an alarm clock, I think that's something that the PDA can take over for. Just have a cradle for it by your bed. As for stereo, why do you need one? Store mp3's (or whatever format) on your computer and wire your house with a speaker system (output device). Now you can control any of these devices from any convienient input/output device (PDA, workstation on your desk, tv, workstation in another room, whatever). You see, this idea of having all these dedicated devices strikes me as a bit silly with all this beautiful digital convergence.
Just my two cents.
--Joshua
Survival.. (Score:2)
Or, looking at it in an evil way; They can't get away with OS/Applications market collusion, so they're expanding into markets the DOJ hasn't prosecuted them for..
Don't Panic (Score:3)
This, of course dosn't mean that M$ isn't the evil empire...
___________________
Just what we need. (Score:2)
M.G.
Re:The way of the giant (Score:2)
A Dick and a Bush .. You know somebody's gonna get screwed.
Re:Monopoly (Score:2)
Re:I've Been Telling People... (Score:4)
Software, on the other hand, almost never hits that saturation point. 95% or more of the cost of making a program is incurred before the first copy even ships: development, marketing, testing, etc. Once copies are being boxeed and shipped in large numbers, each one only costs the company an additional few cents for duplication, printing, and distribution.
Now, enter the Free Software movement (or at least its popular media recognition): you can get your OS, server applications, and business tools absolutely free, with the source code, on your choice of hardware. Connected by the Internet, thousands upon thousands of developers toil away on labors of love, making their OSS projects into the best tools on the market.
One might think that this spelled disaster for the old-school software houses, who relied on a steady stream of income from every shrink-wrapped box. However, that same Internet that made the spread of quality, free tools possible also makes possible a new kind of company...the ASP. ASPs have many of the advantages of the software industry: low cost per unit, easy distribution, etc. However, it also allows for new levels of user authentication (preventing piracy), planned obsolescence (you can only buy a subscription to a service, and the ASP changes the software at will), and lock-in (once all your corporate data is on another company's servers, you're going to think twice about telling them to go screw themselves).
Microsoft, as the world's largest developer of new software, is uniquely positioned to take over the ASP market. They can do this either by moving Windows, Office, and the rest of their end user applications to an ASP model, or by working to become the "standard" developers of ASP platform development tools and applications. With personal hardware thrown into their stable, they can insure that every WebTV box, PocketPC PDA, and X-Box console speaks the Microsoft dialect of networking, and reads and writes exclusively Microsoft documents.
.NET is Microsoft's ASP power-play. If C#, DCOM, et. al. can become standards for server-side distributed business logic, then anything that doesn't play nice with them runs the risk of becoming very unpopular. This is why the success of Linux and *BSD on the desktop is a noble, but less important goal -- the battle now is for control of the network, and the network will be the "killer application" for many years to come.
Jeez. (Score:3)
I think that should be nominated for stupidest name yet. It would have been alright if they had called it the Han Solo2 or something. Jeez, even chewbacca is a better chip name then that.
WINCE! (Windows CE) (Score:2)
I wonder what makes MS think they can pull off a switch like this and make it worth it... I'll be curiously watching to see what sort of evil plan they have, because they must have some sort of plan to embark on such a odd project...