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.
Thread beginning with comment 522741
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
This was obvious trap
by AnXa on Mon 18th Jun 2012 22:52 UTC
AnXa
Member since:
2008-02-10

Hi! Remember this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Belluzzo

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.

Reply Score: 1

RE: This was obvious trap
by bassbeast on Tue 19th Jun 2012 04:44 in reply to "This was obvious trap"
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

Oh lord, again with the crazy. Belluzzo was no more to blame for the death of SGI than Intel was for the death of soundblaster. What happened to SGI was quite simple and happens often in the tech world, a disruptive technology comes along and shoots your business plans all to hell, the same thing happened to Sun and SPARC.

For years SGI held the creative market with an iron hand because commodity PCs simply didn't have the power to compete but the explosion of cheap Windows PCs gave Intel and AMD such huge economies of scale they began to explode with HUGE leaps of power in frankly insanely short amounts of time. Look at the time line folks, look up the numbers. We went from years of 5MHz to 20Mhz speed jumps to suddenly hundreds of MHz with each rev and SGI couldn't keep up. The final nail was the consumer GPU market giving ATI and Nvidia huge economies of scale so they too could leapfrog dedicated companies like SGI. It quickly became the case that the COTS stuff and the huge market of pro and prosumer software that came along with it simply left SGI with no way to justify their high prices and no way to survive on a low margin market.

Look I've always liked weird and underdog arches, SPARC, MIPS, PPC, but in the end it all came down to R&D $$$ and Intel had it, SGI didn't. Heck look at the GFLOPS we are getting out of current CPUs and GPUs, just 4 years ago you'd have had to spend $20K to get what you can now for less than $4K, even with such a huge lead Intel with their tick tocks are putting out scary powerful chips and have been for quite awhile. Heck even Netburst, which was a dog heat wise, doubled its speed in less than 4 years, the advancements were just insane. What happened to SGI wasn't a conspiracy, nor is what is happening to Nokia now, in both cases they simply weren't ready for the entire technology front to do a huge leap and got caught with their pants down, SGI by X86 and Nokia by having bet everything on dumb phones.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE: This was obvious trap
by galvanash on Tue 19th Jun 2012 07:54 in reply to "This was obvious trap"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

Hi! Remember this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Belluzzo

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

RE[2]: This was obvious trap
by joe_tester on Tue 19th Jun 2012 16:18 in reply to "RE: This was obvious trap"
joe_tester Member since:
2011-08-16

There is nothing wrong with a company without their own fab. AMD, Nvidia, VIA... Not to mention ARM.

I think you forgot about Itanic ;) That was the death of SGI.

Lets be honest. The only real reason they steered away from MIPS was not the problem with MIPS but false promises that Intel was making with their "revolutionary" new architecture (I think latest example of such crap from Intel was larrabee).

R10k was announced as last MIPS chip from SGI, because SGI belived Intel and their fantastic new architecture will deliver great performance. And commodity CPU (used by everyone) would be a lot cheaper than investment in MIPS.

When they realized that Itanium will be very late and very far from promises they quickly released R12k and R14k and some new workstations. But it was too late. PC market was going crazy fast with Moore's law. It had no sense to pay 3-4 (or more) for SGI when you could get similar performance from commodity PC.

I think MIPS had great future. SGI stopped investing in new products while the rest of the world continued race forward and that killed them. There was no problem to take MIPS and make CPU with 3-4 times higher clock (r16k went up to 1GHz).

In addition their management didn't want to bring their technology to PC market. This market was quickly conquered by Nvidia.

Edited 2012-06-19 16:20 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1