Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Jun 2012 20:54 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless JLG (we can suffice with his initials on OSNews, right?): "Nokia, once the emperor of mobile phones, shipping more than 100 million devices per quarter, is now in a tailspin, probably irrecoverable, taking its employees into the ground. And there is Nokia's chosen partner, Microsoft. What will Nokia's failure do to its future? Ballmer knows Microsoft can't be relegated to a inconsequential role in the smartphone wars. Will this lead to Microsoft going 'vertical', that is buying Nokia's smartphone business and become an vertically player, as it already is in its Xbox business?" Microsoft will eventually buy Nokia's smartphone business. I mean, it's not as if they have any other serious WP7 OEMs they can piss off with such a move.
Permalink for comment 522842
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: This was obvious trap
by galvanash on Tue 19th Jun 2012 07:54 UTC in reply to "This was obvious trap"
Member since:

Hi! Remember this guy:

You should, because it's a triple-A case what happens when Microsoft and Intel start pulling strings behind the stage. We probably won't have to wait long that Nokia will announce their plans to use Intel chips for their next devices whenever they are tablets or smartphones. Of course these devices will be running Windows NT or Windows CE.

We can compare the actions of the Steven Elop and Richard Belluzzo and probably find more similarities than there are differences. The Script of this play was written long time ago.

I can't say I am a fan of either of these guys - but let me play devil's advocate for a change. What if maybe, just maybe, instead of these guys being hell bent on destroying the companies they ran they simply saw the writing on the wall before everyone else did...

I won't speak about Elop because frankly I know almost nothing about Nokia - but SGI I do know about. Yes, Richard Belluzzo steered SGI away from MIPS - but I have to say that for the most part MIPS was dead already - SGI needed to be steered...

In hindsight, I think the smartest move in the early to mid 1990s would have been a merger/partnership between DEC and SGI (imagine O2s with Alpha CPU boards and RealityEngines in them - the best of both worlds) but that was never in the cards. SGI's core competency was 3D - they should have never been in the business of designing CPUs. They were also without a fab, relying on Toshiba and NEC to fab their chips - this bit them repeatedly throughout their history. It is _really_ hard to compete as a fabless chip maker when there is someone like Intel around who can just swop in and manufacture you into oblivion. Ask AMD...

The Pentium Pro in 1995 changed the game. It was not the Itanium boogieman that was the writing on the wall for MIPS (unlike Alpha), it was the lowly Pentium Pro - a real, available, ultra-cheap, mass-produced, $400 chip that frankly blew the doors off of everything on the market at the time short of Alpha. MIPS never had an answer for it, except the R1000 a year later (at $3000), but it was only a tiny bit faster and was never widely available because of production problems. That was also SGI's last MIPS chip.

All I am saying is that yes, Richard Belluzzo may have been a Microsoft Mole, but any competent CEO running SGI in 1996 would have had to run screaming away from MIPS in some other direction - it was a total and complete dead end. But he didn't do that, because he didn't become CEO until 1998 - in other words he came along way too late to right the ship, he was just desperately bailing water for those before him who didn't see the inevitable coming 2 years earlier.

He may have done everything for the wrong reasons - but at least part (if not most) of what he did were the right things...

ps. The one thing he did that was completely and utterly wrong had next to nothing to do with Microsoft - he settled with nVidia and agreed for SGI to exit the high-end graphics market. That I agree whole-heartedly was stupid. But abandoning MIPS was not.

Edited 2012-06-19 07:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4