A start-up called Tilera today unveiled a chip it calls the TILE-Gx. Essentially, it’s a super-chip with 36 cores which — so the company claims — beats a traditional Intel server chip on the key metric of performance per watt.

For those who don’t keep score in the arcane world of semiconductors, I’ll revisit some of the basics of the above paragraph. We all know that Intel and its one main rival, Advanced Micro Devices, sell chips for servers. Those chips, and those that go into PCs, are generally known as x86 chips, a name derived from the instruction set they share.

On the other hand, there are ARM chips, which are a different breed, and exist in a very different ecosystem. Scores of companies make ARM-based chips for all kinds of different uses, and they license the basics of the designs from ARM, the company, which last year did $636 million in revenue.

ARM chips show up in phones and tablets from the likes of Broadcom, Qualcomm, Texas Instruments and Nvidia, but not so much in PCs and servers. ARM is even the basis for Apple’s A4 and A5 chips. At CES last year, Microsoft said it would create a version of Windows 8 that will support ARM chips. And a company called Calxeda (which I initially got mixed up with Tilera) is aiming to bring ARM cores to chips running in servers.

Tilera, based in San Jose, Calif., is backed by investments from Bessemer Venture Partners, Walden International, Columbia Capital and VentureTech Alliance; plus a trio of strategic investors, Quanta Computer, NTT Finance and Broadcom. Its new chip is based around an entirely new architecture developed by Tilera’s CTO Anant Agarwal, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. It forgoes both the traditional x86 and ARM architectures. Aimed squarely at servers, its intention is to get the same work done that a traditional Intel server chip does, while using less power to do it.

That’s not a trivial benefit, especially in data center environments where servers are bunched together and pushed to the performance limit. The biggest operational expense in running them is going to be power. So it’s on this point that server vendors and chip vendors obsess over saving a watt here and there — over the machine’s useful lifetime, the costs will add up considerably.

How it does this is what makes it interesting. Essentially, the cores on the chip do something that an Intel chip can’t do: They communicate among themselves. The way I understand it — and I admit I’m simplifying it greatly — the cores on an x86 chip rely on a single communications channel, called the Bus, to communicate. The Tilera architecture allows each core to communicate directly with the other cores, thus eliminating the need for the Bus and cutting back on the need for power.

The top-end chip — there are two versions — has 36 cores. A core is essentially the main computing engine on a chip. If you’re reading this on a PC, chances are the chip inside it has two cores, maybe four. It used to be that chips had only one core, until it became logical to put two or more on a single chip. I’ve always compared multicore chips to roommates folding laundry together. When there’s a big pile of laundry to be folded, one person can certainly do it, but two or four get it done faster and with less effort. Multicore chips basically prove the old adage that many hands make for fast work.

There’s an obvious appeal to a chip like this, but there are a lot of strikes against it. First, much of the server ecosystem is pretty well entrenched. Companies run what applications they already have, and are usually loath to mess with their computing environments much. Changing the architecture of the CPU chip inside the servers is about as major a decision as a CIO may ever make, and one they don’t make lightly. First they’ll have to test it and run it for awhile, and then see how it interacts with other systems. It’s not the sort of decision that happens just overnight. Also, a new architecture brings with it a lot of software compatibility questions that will give many IT departments pause.

Meanwhile, Intel, which sells chips that go into most of the world’s mainstream servers, will continue to push its power consumption down. At the same time, it’s been trying like crazy to use its Atom line of chips to mount an attack on ARM’s territory and win business from phone and tablet vendors. That effort is just now seeing its first early successes. If there’s a great long-term story in chips that bears watching, the grappling between Intel and the ever-expanding universe of ARM vendors is certainly it.

Correction: I initially thought the Tilera chip was based on the ARM architecture. I’ve revised the story to correct that.

The vast majority of servers — including those from H-P — use the chips sold by Intel and AMD that are based on a technology called x86. But HP, which jointly developed Itanium with Intel in the 1990s, continues to use that chip for three lines of large systems used for heavy-duty computing jobs.

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

And while it was Fujitsu, using SPARC chips, that made the top of the list, you couldn’t help noticing how many machines used chips from Intel. Of the 500 supercomputers on the list, 384 of them use chips from the semiconductor giant.

At the SC11 Supercomputing conference in Seattle today, Intel is making some important disclosures about what it is doing to maintain its role as the chip vendor of choice, and also offering its competitive response to a potential threat from the graphics chip specialist Nvidia.

As I’ve explained a few times before, the graphics chips, or GPUs, that Nvidia makes are starting to make some inroads into supercomputing and high-performance computing environments, thanks to their ability to handle floating point computations at a high rate of speed. Sometime next year, at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, a machine called Titan, using a combination of chips from Advanced Micro Devices and Nvidia, is expected to break the 20 petaflop barrier when it begins operation.

The narrative that has emerged recently is that GPUs are generally better at the floating point operations that are increasingly used in supercomputing — better in many cases than traditional x86 chips from Intel and AMD. Even so, if you add up the number of systems on the Top 500 list using Intel and AMD chips, you’d hit a percentage that’s just shy of 90.

In a presentation today (on what just happens to be the 40th birthday of the Intel microprocessor — hence the two people I saw today outside the “Today” show at Rockefeller Center on my way to work), Rajeeb Hazra, Intel’s general manager of Technical Computing, detailed Intel’s response. First off, Intel is supporting a new technology, called PCI Express 3.0, that will speed up the ability of chips inside a supercomputer to share data. In systems this big, and working on such large amounts of data at once, the processors spend a lot of time tapping their feet and waiting for data to work on. Engineers call this latency, and the point of the new interconnect technology is to cut latency by doubling the bandwidth available. The result is an improvement in the raw FLOPS (floating point operations) available by 2.1 times in lab tests, and a 70 percent improvement in real-world workload tests. In supercomputing terms, that’s real progress, and it effectively means getting answers to big questions faster.

Another advance that Intel talked about today is a chip bearing the codename “Knight’s Corner.” It’s a coprocessor, meaning it’s an additional chip that would be added to a computer to boost its performance. Intel says it can do a full teraflop — a trillion floating point operations a second — and that’s just the result of demonstrations from the first silicon. When in full production, it will probably do even better.

And not only will it do a teraflop on a single chip, it will perform those calculations to what engineers call “double precision,” which is a fancy way of saying the result of each operation will be accurate to a higher level of granularity. As John Hengeveld, Intel’s director of technical computer marketing, told me last week, the rule of thumb in these matters says that moving from single to double precision boosts the amount of time you have to wait by four times.

Why is that important, when an off-the-shelf GPU from Nvidia can do 2 teraflops — though only at the single-point precision? Programming. If you’re a scientist who 10 years ago wrote a program to simulate weather patterns or nuclear explosions or some other classic supercomputing problem to run on systems running Intel chips, there’s nothing new to learn in terms of programming. While the GPUs are great, there are new programming rules to learn.

Finally, Intel is reiterating its plan to keep working on the exascale problem, which is the next great summit in supercomputing. Right now the world’s top supercomputer maxes out at 10.51 petaflops, and a candidate to top the list next year will go north of 20 petaflops, or quadrillions of floating point operations. Sometime this decade — say, about 2018 or so — the hope is that supercomputers will break the exaflop barrier, where machines will run quintillions of FLOPs.

The fundamental problem there isn’t the computing so much as it is power, as in electrical power. Already some of these machines consume as much power as a small city. Getting to exascale will require chips and other components that can run full out at speeds we can as yet only imagine, but doing it consuming a lot less power than they would otherwise be expected to. Think in terms of a Prius that could win the Indy 500 — and not just by a hair, but by a long mile — and do it day after day without really using much more gas than the other cars. It’s kind of like that.

Anyhow, Intel has said that it plans to enable exascale supercomputing that will require only a doubling of the power needed, rather than, say, 10 times as much. To that end, it said today it will open its fourth research lab in Europe. This one is in Barcelona and joins one in Paris; another in Juelich, Germany; and a third in Lueven, Belgium. They’ll all have a lot of work to do between now and 2018.

In his first on-the-record interview since joining Oracle last year, co-President Mark Hurd tells AllThingsD that Oracle is experiencing a lot of company-specific momentum in Europe, where it saw 14 percent revenue growth in quarterly results reported last week.

“When I look at each segment of our business in Europe, if I read to you the growth rates of each of our product segments, it would sound very consistent,” Hurd said. “We didn’t have any one big deal or transaction that stood out. Europe was a bright spot in the quarter for us.”

Hurd also talked about the state of Oracle’s hardware business, much of which it picked up in its acquisition of Sun Microsystems last year. Hurd reiterated previous comments that Oracle aims to focus more of its efforts on selling hardware that contains more Oracle intellectual property, and thus commands a higher price and profit margin, than on commodity hardware. Oracle CEO Larry Ellison raised eyebrows when he said that Oracle wouldn’t mind if its business selling hardware running Intel-based chips — its so-called x86 business — fell to zero.

“We’re focused on adding value to customers. If there’s no Oracle intellectual property in it then you ought to buy it from someone else,” Hurd said. “All of our products are designed to be the best-of-breed in the markets that they serve. If it’s some product that comes from a third party that comes through Oracle where we add no value, that’s the stuff we have no interest in.”

The comments came in an interview with AllThingsD today, Hurd’s first since he joined Oracle last year, which followed his resignation from HP a month before. A fuller version of the interview will be posted soon.

At least when it comes to Oracle software, they’re not cutting back at all, says Brian Schwartz of ThinkEquity research, in a note to clients out today. Sales of application licenses at Oracle saw their fastest growth rate during an Oracle Q1 since before the recession, making for a “sign of healthy Enterprise IT demand,” Schwartz wrote.

Overall, Oracle beat the consensus view of analysts on several metrics, including revenue ($8.4 billion, or $50 million ahead of the street) and per-share earnings (48 cents a share, two cents above consensus). On top of that, Oracle issued guidance that license revenue would continue to grow at a rate of six to 16 percent, which was also above consensus. Also: Free cash flow grew 42 percent to $5.3 billion in the quarter, a big improvement over the year-ago quarter when Oracle’s free cash flow was flat.

All good news, right? Not quite, Schwartz writes. Oracle’s hardware business is still on the comeback trail. Hardware systems product revenue declined five percent year over year, because of a shift toward higher-margin products and away from higher-volume, less profitable ones. Oracle’s plan is to essentially phase out the higher-volume servers that came with its Sun Microsystems acquisition from last year. The plan is to focus on higher-end hardware that commands a higher profit margin at sale and to phase out the less-profitable stuff. As CEO Larry Ellison said during a conference call with analysts last night: “I don’t care if our commodity x86 business goes to zero,” he said. “We don’t make any money selling those things. We have no interest in selling other people’s [intellectual property]. … We have interest in selling systems that include our IP.” By systems with “other people’s IP,” he’s referring to mainstream servers that use chips from Intel — hence the reference to x86, Intel’s DNA — and operating systems from Microsoft.

The end result, Schwartz says, is that hardware sales came in $200 million short of the consensus expectation, while the profitability of hardware sales was, at 54 percent, much better than a year ago. Clearly it’s taking awhile to turn the battleship. Oracle said that unit sales of Exadata and Exalogic hardware almost tripled; the company added 100 new customers and promised to triple the number of deployments yet again in 2012.

All that leads Schwartz to rate Oracle a Buy, with a price target of $36. As of this morning, the shares were already headed in that direction: Oracle rose by more than $2 a share — or more than seven percent, to $30.38 a share — after about a half hour of trading.

Although the new Windows offers a number of upsides, including the fact it runs on a wider range of processors, such flexibility comes at a cost.

Systems that run Windows 8 using low-power ARM processors will be able to run all of the new-style Windows applications, but it appears few traditional Windows programs will run. Microsoft demonstrated a technology preview of Office running on ARM back in January, but Sinofsky said that in general older Windows applications won’t run on ARM-based machines.

That’s not to say Microsoft didn’t make the right choices when it comes to Windows 8. Were Microsoft to have brought over all of its legacy to the new chips, it might well have lost the long battery life and other benefits that ARM-based systems can provide.

A strong case can be made that this break with the past is exactly what Microsoft needed in order to compete with a new generation of devices running operating systems designed with mobility in mind.

However, the choice means that Microsoft and its partners will need lots of new apps to make Windows 8 a success. Indeed, a big part of this week’s Build conference will be equipping developers with the tools they need to write such programs and convincing them of the upside of doing so.

Recognizing this, some of Redmond’s partners are taking matters into their own hands. Nvidia, for example, plans its own program to convince developers to write new-style Windows apps.

“We’re going to be investing in our own effort to get developers on board,” Nvidia General Manager Rene Haas said in an interview.

But if the company faces challenges getting developers to write the new apps, Haas said he is not worried about finding PC makers willing to make machines with the ARM-based processors. Such systems, he said, can be slimmer and cheaper and offer better battery life than those running traditional PC processors from Intel and AMD, he said.

“We’ve seen very big OEM interest,” Haas said, using the industry term for PC makers. “Virtually every OEM around the world wants to do something with Windows-on-ARM.”

Related posts

• Exclusive: Making Sense of Our First Look at Windows 8
• Windows 8 Gets Ready for Its Big Debut
• Gearing Up for Microsoft’s Big Week
• Microsoft Details Windows 8 at Build Conference in Anaheim
• What We Just Learned About Windows 8
• Microsoft Releases First Test Version of Windows 8
• Windows 8 Forces Some Compromises After All
• Boys and Their Toys: Developers Rush to Get Windows 8 Tablets
• Windows 8 Shows Its Server Side
• Ballmer: 500,000 Downloads of Windows 8 Since Last Night

The move is no doubt a blow to Intel’s meager Itanium business, but it’s surprising that Oracle waited this long. Both Microsoft and RedHat announced they were jumping ship last year. Microsoft said last year that Windows Server 2008 R2 would be the last operating system to support Itanium. RedHat dropped its support with the release of Enterprise Linux 6.

From an operating system standpoint that leaves HP-UX, Hewlett-Packard’s variant of Unix as the only real option, which makes some sense since HP sells nearly all the Itanium-based servers on the market.

It’s also a bit of a turn of events. As CNet’s Stephen Shankland points out, it was only five years ago Oracle CEO Larry Ellison said “There is no more important platform for Oracle than HP and Itanium.”

That of course was before Oracle owned Sun Microsystems. Since then, and after former HP CEO Mark Hurd left to become an Oracle co-president, Ellison has turned bashing HP into something of a hobby. It wasn’t hard to detect a bit of a sneer as Oracle’s press release pointed out that in his strategy remarks last week, HP CEO Léo Apotheker didn’t mention Itanium once.

Intel had gone to a great deal of effort to develop the 64-bit server chip, and at the beginning of the last decade portrayed it as a significant leap forward in server computing. The problem was that it wasn’t backward compatible with existing software written for Intel’s standard x86 chips, and so software meant to run on Itanium systems required extra work or had to developed separately.

This caused the kind of controversy that only computer scientists could love and prompted one of the more interesting chapters in the decades-old rivalry between Intel and its much smaller rival Advanced Micro Devices. AMD suggested a very different approach to 64-bit computing by simply extending the standard x86 platform. Software initially developed for standard 32-bit chips could run without any of the extra work on a 64-bit system. The industry liked it, and within a few years AMD had implemented the idea on its Opteron server chips. During 2005 and 2006 AMD built up enough momentum to take away some of Intel’s share of the server market.

Under pressure, Intel changed its mind and, beginning in 2004, started putting out its own x86-compatible 64-bit chips. Its Intel64 technology is now a standard across its server, desktop and notebook chips. And it got most of its share of the server market back with its Xeon line.

Despite the fact that it never really caught on, Intel is still putting out Itanium chips, though it’s really a niche product. It updated the line last year with the Itanium 9300. It also has two future chips in the family still in the pipeline, one codenamed Poulson, the other codenamed Kittson. Time will tell if either ever see the light of day. Few companies buy servers built around Itanium chips.

HP was an early partner in the chip’s development, just last week announced a new Itanium-based blade system, and continues to sell its Itanium-based Superdone line. However the HP unit responsible for selling those systems, Business Critical Systems, is showing no sign of progress. In its most recent quarter, revenues fell slightly to $555 million from the year-ago period.

And while it will continue to run existing Oracle installations and still enjoy Oracle support, these machines won’t be able to run future versions of Oracle’s database. That’s not going to help HP sell any more of these boxes.

Shares in ARM have nearly tripled in value from this time a year ago, and the most recent surge occurred in December, when the first reports emerged that Microsoft would do something that previously seemed almost unthinkable: Create a version of Windows designed to run on chips other than the x86 chips from Intel and Advanced Micro Devices. Microsoft confirmed the news two days ago. If 2011 is going to be the year of the tablet, then chances are it’s going to be the year of ARM chips.

The funny thing is, practically every year has been a good year for ARM chips. They’re so widely used already that there’s a good chance you use them, probably several of them, every day. During its most recent quarter, more than 900 million ARM-based chips were sold in mobile devices like smartphones and tablets, while another 600 million were used in devices as varied as TV, toys, cars, alarm clocks and remote controls.

ARM doesn’t build the chips itself; it designs the cores–or central brains–used on those chips. I like to compare it to selling a basic cake recipe. If you’re a baker whose expertise is making really great frosting, why bother dreaming up a brand-new cake recipe when you can use an existing one, and instead use your time and effort to make great frosting? A lot of semiconductor and electronics companies have reached the same conclusion, and paid to license ARM’s recipes for chips, and then built their own custom enhancements around the ARM core.

It’s a pretty popular recipe. The company issued more than 700 licenses as of last year to some 250 chip companies, which then turned around and sold the chips to more than 1,000 manufacturers. ARM estimates that in 2009 four billion chips based on its designs were sold, and that more than 20 billion have been sold in the two decades since the company launched.

Aside from the three ARM-based chips from Texas Instruments, Nvidia and Qualcomm that Microsoft demonstrated running Windows as part of CEO Steve Ballmer’s Jan. 5 keynote presentation at CES, the list of companies using ARM includes Samsung, Broadcom, Toshiba and scores of smaller chip companies.

ARM also has an interesting history. It was founded as a joint venture between Apple and a British outfit called Acorn Computers in 1990. Apple’s interest was to create and develop a chip that would run the Newton, and spur the development of a new-age handheld computer that the Newton was supposed to bring about. (As a few commenters note below, the first ARM chips were used in desktop computers sold primarily in the U.K.) The Newton went nowhere, but the vision for ARM as the chip of choice for mobile computing was right on the money. ARM chips from Motorola (now Freescale) landed in devices from Palm and early handhelds running Windows Mobile. ARM flourished and went public on the London Stock Exchange in 1998. Between 1998 and 2004, Apple sold off its ARM shares for combined proceeds of almost $800 million.

Now having built a considerable lead in the wireless world, ARM-based chips look awfully strong as the battle over tablets shapes up. And beyond that lies higher-end computing opportunities like servers. Some think Intel should be worried. Despite this week’s launch of its Sandy Bridge generation of PC processors, Intel’s shares are trading lower today than they did at the start of the week.

I caught up briefly with ARM Executive Vice President Antonio Viana by phone from CES to talk about the year ahead for ARM.

There’s been a lot of attention around ARM coming into the Windows fold, and everyone knows it from its strength in the wireless devices. How is 2011 shaping up for ARM?

We got our start more than 20 years introducing a chip architecture aimed primarily at the mobile industry. We offered a chip design that’s efficient in the way it consumes power. What happened was the technology moved beyond the cellphone: Into the home, cars, printers. And that trend is continuing. Consumers want features that require a lot more computing power. Some of these devices are handhelds, some aren’t. What makes the ARM architecture central to all that is that industry brings their own secret sauce, their own pieces to the table. The development with Microsoft is just a small microcosm of that.

Are there new licensees coming on?

Our roadmap is constantly evolving, and we’ve developed the architecture for a pretty broad set of use cases. We license to companies like NXP that are relatively simple 8- and 16-bit microcontroller chips that go into industrial equipment, or meters or toys. But because of the network connectivity requirements that are starting to come to those devices, you’re starting to see some of these move to more versatile 32-bit chips and the costs are manageable because developers are so used to working with ARM. Then if you swing way out to the other extreme we just launched our A15 architecture. That’s a multicore design, and it’s finding its way into next-generation servers.

Who’s using that?

Unfortunately, we can’t say yet. A15 was announced last year. We think we’ll start seeing production silicon in the latter half of next year, and there will be samples before that. When you start seeing samples then the partners working with it will start announcing products.

Obviously Intel has its Atom processor, which it has aimed at tablets and handhelds and many other market segments you’re involved in. What kind of competitive threat do you see from Intel?

The competitive threat is certainly there–x86 is incredibly robust and it has the incredible capital resources of Intel behind it. ‘Nuff said. Intel will be successful in various markets they go after. We’d be fools not to acknowledge that. But the question is who’s going to grow more? Who is going to leverage off the market trends right now? Tablets are a wonderful example of that. Right now about 90 percent of all tablets in the marketplace are ARM-powered. At a show like CES you see a lot of things that indicate the market trends. You always have to take a step back and wonder which of the things you see may never happen. But the trends are usually accurate. One of those trends is for always-on, always-connected power-efficient devices. When you look at it that way I’m pretty comfortable with ARM’s position.

“The next generation of Windows is going to evolve on new hardware,” said Windows unit President Steven Sinofsky.

Before the demo though, Sinofsky traced the history of Windows, noting that from 1992 through Windows Vista the system requirements increased significantly from one version to the next. With Windows 7, though, Microsoft held most technical requirements steady and even lowered some of them.

As for the demo of the new stuff, Sinofsky began with a few caveats.

“We are calling this a technology demonstration,” he said, cautioning it wouldn’t show any new user face stuff or address pricing, timing, etc.

Sinofsky said it is too soon to talk about what requirements will be for the next version of Windows, but said the company is keenly aware of the need to have Windows running on ever-smaller devices.

Update 1:25 pm Microsoft has three demos and it is saving Windows on ARM for last. It’s starting by hoeing off some new PCs running on the current version of Windows–Windows 7.

The second demo will be an update of touch input on Microsoft’s tabletop Surface computer, and the final one will show Windows running on ARM.

1:33 pm The next-generation Surface is thinner and uses infrared cameras inside the screen’s pixels instead of a big projector, allowing for devices that can be either a tabletop or mounted vertically. It will be cheaper as well, though Microsoft doesn’t say how much the machines will cost. First-generation Surface machines had a price tag in the thousands of dollars.

On to the chip demos.

Microsoft starts by showing a development board using a next-generation Intel design running Quicken.

Okay, nod to Intel complete.

Next up is Office running on an ARM chip. This demo is on Microsoft Word and has it printing to an Epson printer. Microsoft shows demos of chips from Qualcomm, Nvidia and Texas Instruments.

On the Nvidia machine, Microsoft shows hardware, accelerated browsing in IE9 running on a Tegra 2 processor, as well as running PowerPoint and an “Iron Man” movie preview.

1:48 pm Asked by Mobilized what work still needs to take place to make Windows on ARM a reality, Sinofsky says that it is the case that programs compiled for x86 processors won’t immediately run on ARM chips, but said the company isn’t ready to talk about the programming model. He does say it is unlikely Microsoft would use virtualization to make old programs, suggesting there will be some work for developers.

Sinfosky says that Microsoft has done the work to enable Windows to run and create a framework for third parties to build software and device drivers.

As for the timing, Sinofsky doesn’t give a date, but does reiterate that Microsoft these days aims to have a new release of Windows every 24 months to 36 months. “I don’t think it’s that long away,” he says. He notes some people want Windows releases faster while other large customers would rather have more time between releases. “Somewhere [around] 24 to 36 months between releases seems about right.”

The ARM compatibility will go into the next release of Windows, but Sinofsky takes time to point out to Mobilized that once again, he isn’t calling it Windows 8.

“This is the next generation of Windows,” he says.

The new technology is expected to allow computer makers to offer significant gains in performance over prior products, the typical pattern as the chip makers race to pack more features on tiny squares of silicon. But some key strategies of the longtime rivals are diverging.

Intel, by far the biggest supplier of the electronic calculating engines for computers, wants to push the x86 technology that originated in personal computers into the biggest servers on the market.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Then there’s Itanium. The high-end microprocessor line, originally developed with help from Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), uses an entirely different technology than the x86 chips that Intel popularized in desktop and laptop PCs and low-end servers. Itanium models have tended to lag the production processes used to manufacture other Intel chips, but the disparity seems particularly stark with the latest version.

Tukwila, the code name for a long-delayed Itanium model introduced Monday, is being built using manufacturing technology that creates lines of circuitry with features rated at 65 nanometers, or billionths of meter. That’s two technology generations behind the 32-nanometer process used in Intel’s latest x86 chips; the company earlier this year announced a $7 billion plan to accelerate the conversion of its U.S. factories to 32-nanometer technology.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

How much longer does Apple plan to continue its iPhone exclusivity contract with AT&T? Some say until June, when the device arrives on Verizon’s airwaves. Others say fall.

Not unreasonable predictions given issues with AT&T’s network and the simple fact that adding Verizon (VZ) would more than double the iPhone’s addressable market. But perhaps a bit overeager, particularly in light of Apple COO Tim Cook’s remarks about the carrier during a company earnings call Monday.

Asked about AT&T (T), the bad press its network has been receiving lately and the impact of negative reports on the Apple (AAPL) brand, Cook defended the carrier.

“First of all, AT&T is a great partner,” he said. “We’ve been working with them since well before we announced the first iPhone. And I think it is important to remember they had more mobile broadband usage than any other carrier in the world.”

Emphasizing the large view, Cook continued, “And in the vast majority of locations we think that iPhone customers are having a great experience, from the research that we have done. As you know, AT&T has acknowledged that they are having some issues in a few cities and they have very detailed plans to address these. We have personally reviewed these plans, and we have very high confidence that they will make significant progress toward fixing them.”

Now, Cook’s remarks certainly don’t preclude the possibility that Apple will end its exclusivity arrangement with AT&T. But his eager defense of the carrier suggests there’s at least a chance that his company will renew it.

Of course, Apple did a hell of a job talking up the PowerPC architecture too–right up until it dumped it for Intel’s (INTC) x86 design in 2006.

How will Google bring Chrome OS to market? The company is working with vendors to specify reference hardware. You cannot download and install Chrome on just any device, you will have to purchase a Chrome device. Google is looking at a launch window of late 2010, before the holidays.

Google sounds very concerned about the end-user Chrome OS experience. Pichai says the company wants to ensure that the displays, keyboard, etc., on the netbooks that run Chrome are robust and easy to use.

Pichai wraps things up, but before the Q&A, we’re shown a short explanatory video. “The first thing I want to do when I fire up my computer is browse the Internet….If there isn’t any Internet, I might not even use my computer….What if when you pressed on, your PC turned on, what if your operating system was more like a Web browser…what if it was a browser?…Chrome OS is a totally rethought computer that lets you focus on the Internet, which is what most of use our computers for these days anyway.”

Q&A
At this point, Sundar Pichai opens the event to questions:

If you’re specifying hardware components, do you have an idea of what they’ll cost?

A: “We expect Chrome netbooks to be in the price range of what people have come to expect….We are not specifying a price target.” Price will be determined at the OEM level.

Will the APIs support W3C standards?

A: “We’re working very closely with the W3C to standardize as much as we can….In general we want to see everything standardized across multiple browsers.”

Will there be an application store?

A: “The Web offers hundreds of millions of applications. Our job is to make people aware of them.”

What about desktop applications that are not available on the Web?

A: “We expect most of our users to have a second machine at home….Chrome OS is about a delightful experience on the Web….If you’re a lawyer spending your entire day on contracts, etc., this is not the machine for you.”

Will you support Microsoft Silverlight?

A: In the case of certain selection plug-ins, we are working to integrate them. No comment beyond that.

Since Chrome is open source, could people build their own variations?

A: Yes. We expect people will do many interesting things with it.

Do you see Chrome running on laptops or desktops?

A: We’re initially focused on netbook-like form factors–clamshells, etc. That said, the OS is being developed to work on other devices.

Is there any level of offline access? What happens when I’m on a plane and don’t want to pay for Wi-Fi?

A: Chrome devices are primarily intended to be Internet-connected. That said, it will have some caching abilities so, for example, you could play a game offline.

Virtualization?

A: Yes. You could run Chrome today on a virtual machine.

Are you working with outfits like Adobe to, say, build a Web-friendly version of Photoshop?

A: We’re very excited by things like Photoshop on the Web and we’re working hard to make that possible.

Will Android apps work on Chrome? Are there plans for third-party apps?

A: Pichai dodges this one. If it’s a Web app, he says, it will work on Chrome. The Web works very, very well for Google’s purposes, he adds.

Will Chrome work on both X86 and ARM?

A: Yes.

Is there a direct business model for Chrome OS or is this another variation of the-more-people-who-use-the-Web-the-better-for-Google?

A: We are working with partners. No plans for advertising. That said, Pichai notes again that anything that runs on the Web will run on Chrome. And of course, AdWords does, indeed, run on the Web.

[Sergey Brin joins the Q&A]

Do you want Android Apps to run on Chrome?

A: We are focused on creating the use case in which everything is a Web application, but hopefully we can do more in the future.

How does Chrome handle peripherals? Can it print?

A: Most keyboards, cameras, phones, etc., will work. In terms of printing…yes, Chrome OS will print and we’re working hard to make that possible.

What is Chrome’s strategic position for Google?

A: [Brin]: Call us dumb businessmen, but we really focus on user needs rather than focus on business strategies. We believe that the Web platform is a much simpler way of computing for individuals to use, and that’s a very important need in the market right now. That’s what we’re trying to fulfill.

Speaking at Microsoft’s Worldwide Partner Conference in New Orleans this past July, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said of Google’s forthcoming Chrome OS, “Who knows what this thing is?”

Today, he found out. The operating system, a direct challenge to Microsoft Windows, was on display at a media gathering at the Google HQ this morning.

Sundar Pichai, vice president of product management, and Matthew Papakipos, engineering director for Google Chrome OS, presided over the event, which the company described as a “technical announcement.”

That meant that Google (GOOG) was not releasing a beta of the operating system this week, as had been rumored.

That said, it was an overview of Chrome, as well as Google’s plans for its launch in 2010, so let the Chrome OS liveblogging begin:

• There will be no beta today. Pichai says Google is still a year away from an official launch. However, the company is making the code available today.
• Pichai says that a year after launch, the Chrome browser has some 40 millions users. He boasts about the browser’s speed, noting that it handles Javascript 39 times faster than Microsoft’s (MSFT) Internet Explorer. There will be three more big Chrome announcements sometime in the future: Chrome for Mac, Chrome for Linux and the debut of Chrome Extensions.
• Google’s goal is to ensure that Web applications function as well as desktop apps. Pichai says that the company is figuring out a way for Web apps to safely take advantage of the operating system in the way desktop apps do. A few examples: Graphics, video/audio applications, real-time communication, notification and local storage.

  “By 2010 we expect to have all these things built into Chrome,” Pichai adds.

• The advent of Chrome coincides with a perfect storm of converging trends, Pichai says, noting the tremendous popularity of netbooks during the recession, the growing acceptance of cloud apps and the rapid innovation in mobile devices. Smartphones are becoming more like laptops, Pichai adds, and laptops are becoming more like smartphones. Is there a better level of computing available for these devices?

  There is, according to Pichai, and Google believes it is Chrome OS.

• Among Chrome OS’s advantages, Pichai says: Speed, simplicity and security. Every application will be a Web application. There will be no desktop apps. Chrome OS is essentially a browser with a few modifications. All data in the Chrome OS resides in the cloud. Pichai: “We want all of personal computing to work that way….If I lose my Chrome machine, I should be able to go out, buy a new [one] and re-create my previous computing experience easily.”

  Chrome OS will run completely inside the browser security model, he adds, noting that security is one of Google’s top priorities along with speed. “Turning on a PC should be like turning on your TV,” he says.

• Chrome OS is very similar in appearance to the Chrome browser. “Chrome OS is Chrome,” says Pichai. Google made it look like a browser, because the browser is familiar.
• And indeed, Chrome OS does look quite a bit like a browser. Multiple apps load into tabs, for example. It also features “Panels,” which Pichai describes as persistent lightweight windows. “All Chrome data resides in the cloud. Anything you put in the machine is immediately available to you anywhere.”
• As netbooks become more advanced and battery life improves, they will evolve into entertainment devices, says Pichai, who notes that via Google Books, a netbook can become an e-reader, and, through YouTube, a video device.
• A quick demo of the user interface, which seems very simple and intuitive. “It just works,” says Pichai in an unintentional nod to Apple (AAPL).

  An interesting remark: Anyone who writes an app for the Web has written an app for Chrome, says Pichai, joking that Microsoft is already developing for it.

• Speed, simplicity and security, says Pichai. We’re trying to make the computing experience delightful.

With that, Pichai hands the stage over to Engineering Director Matt Papakipos.

• Papakipos, too, offers the “we want to make computing delightful” sound byte and notes once again that turning on the PC should be like turning on the TV.
• Chrome OS eliminates the bootloader, auto-launching the browser. The OS also auto-updates itself, making sure that it’s always current with security patches, etc. Everything from the firmware to the kernel is secured with a cryptographic signature to ensure a secure boot. In the event malware is detected, the system repairs itself automatically.
• The basic application security protocol for current operating systems allows apps the same privileges as the user. This presents obvious security issues. Whenever you install a new app, you’re taking a risk, says Papakipos.

  But Web applications like those that Chrome OS use, are different. They are Web apps, so they don’t have system-level privileges. Additionally, all apps run in secured sandboxes that are separate from one other and from the OS. Finally, all apps must be signed and verified before each use.

• In terms of file systems, Chrome’s is locked down. It’s a read-only root-file system, obviously quite different from other operating systems. All user data are encrypted and synched to the cloud. Essentially, Google uses the PC for caching. Again, if you should lose your machine, you buy a new one, fire it up and it synchs with the cloud, restoring your previous computing experience.
• How will Google bring Chrome OS to market? The company is working with vendors to specify reference hardware. You cannot download and install Chrome on just any device, you will have to purchase a Chrome device. Google is looking at a launch window of late 2010, before the holidays.
• Google sounds very concerned about the end-user Chrome OS experience. Pichai says the company wants to ensure that the displays, keyboard, etc., on the netbooks that run Chrome are robust and easy to use.
• Pichai wraps things up, but before the Q&A, we’re shown a short explanatory video. “The first thing I want to do when I fire up my computer is browse the Internet….If there isn’t any Internet, I might not even use my computer….What if when you pressed on, your PC turned on, what if your operating system was more like a Web browser…what if it was a browser?…Chrome OS is a totally rethought computer that lets you focus on the Internet, which is what most of use our computers for these days anyway.”

Q&A

At this point, Pichai opens the event to questions:

If you’re specifying hardware components, do you must have an idea of what they’ll cost?

A: We expect Chrome netbooks to be in the price range of what people have come to expect….We are not specifying a price target. Price will be determined at the OEM level.

Will the APIs support W3C standards?

A: We’re working very closely with the W3C to standardize as much as we can….In general, we want to see everything standardized across multiple browsers.

Will there be an application store?

A: The Web offers hundreds of millions of applications. Our job is to make people aware of them.

What about desktop applications that are not available on the Web?

A: We expect most of our users to have a second machine at home….Chrome OS is about a delightful experience on the Web….If you’re a lawyer spending your entire day on contracts, etc., this is not the machine for you.

Will you support Microsoft Silverlight?

A: In the case of certain selection plug-ins, we are working to integrate them. No comment beyond that.

Since Chrome is open source, could people build their own variations?

A: Yes. We expect people will do many interesting things with it.

Do you see Chrome running on laptops or desktops?

A: We’re initially focused on netbook-like form factors–clamshells, etc. That said, the OS is being developed to work on other devices.

Is there any level of offline access? What happens when I’m on a plane and don’t want to pay for Wi-Fi?

A: Chrome devices are primarily intended to be Internet-connected. That said, it will have some caching abilities so, for example, you could play a game offline.

Virtualization?

A: Yes. You could run Chrome today on a virtual machine.

Are you working with outfits like Adobe to, say, build a Web-friendly version of Photoshop?

A: We’re very excited by things like Photoshop on the Web and we’re working hard to make that possible.

Will Android apps work on Chrome? Are there plans for third-party apps?

A: [Pichai dodges this one.] If it’s a Web app, it will work on Chrome. The Web works very, very well for our purposes.

Will Chrome work on both X86 and ARM?

A: Yes.

Is there a direct business model for Chrome OS or is this another variation of the-more-people-that-use-the-Web-the-better-for-Google?

A: We are working with partners. No plans for advertising. That said, Pichai notes again that anything that runs on the Web will run on Chrome. And of course, AdWords does, indeed, run on the Web.

[Sergey Brin joins the Q&A]

Do you want Android Apps to run on Chrome?

A: We are focused on creating the use case in which everything is a Web application, but hopefully we can do more in the future.

How does Chrome handle peripherals? Can it print?

A: Most keyboards, cameras, phones, etc., will work. In terms of printing…yes, Chrome OS will print and we’re working hard to make that possible.

What is Chrome’s strategic position for Google?

A: [Brin]: Call us dumb businessmen, but we really focus on user needs rather than focus on business strategies. We believe that the Web platform is a much simpler way of computing for individuals to use, and that’s a very important need in the market right now. That’s what we’re trying to fulfill.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091119/a-first-look-at-googles-chrome-os-on-thursday/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20091112/amd-ceo-dirk-meyers/ http://allthingsd.com/20091112/amd-ceo-dirk-meyers/#comments Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:35:54 +0000 John Paczkowski http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/?p=28830 Earlier today, Intel (INTC) and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) announced a comprehensive agreement to end their outstanding legal disputes. Below, AMD CEO Dirk Meyer’s official remarks about the agreement:

Good day everyone … and thank you for joining us. For the past few years, we have been very open in outlining the major steps for AMD’s transformation into a processing powerhouse:

• From the acquisition of ATI Technologies;
• To the formation of GLOBALFOUNDRIES; and
• The creation of AMD-The Product Company,
  o with a single business unit,
  o a reinvigorated roadmap,
  o a new business model,
  o And a close relationship with a world-class leading-
  edge foundry.

Today, I am pleased to announce the last major component of that transformation–in the form of a transparent and public agreement with Intel to create a level playing field in the x86 processor industry–taking us one big step closer to achieving our bold vision.
There are three key components to the agreement:

• First, Intel has agreed to an important set of ground rules that we hope will define the path to a free and open market in the microprocessor industry;
• Second, we have agreed to a new patent cross-license agreement that gives AMD broad rights and the freedom to operate a business utilizing multiple foundries,
• And third, GLOBALFOUNDRIES has agreed to terms that allow them the freedom to operate as an independent world-class leading-edge foundry company, going forward, without being a subsidiary of AMD.

In addition, Intel has agreed to pay AMD $1.25 billion.

Today marks the beginning of a new era… one that confirms that the game has changed for AMD. It is an important milestone for us, for our customers, our partners, and most important–for consumers and businesses worldwide. In addition, it represents the culmination many years of litigation and regulatory engagement.

And we are optimistic that it will usher a new era for our industry. We recognize that it will take time for people to understand how operating conditions in the processor business have changed–but make no mistake–they have changed.

I would like to thank the regulatory agencies around the world for their diligence and consistency. Their work has enabled us to achieve this milestone. We are optimistic they will continue their vigilance in maintaining a level playing field, especially with respect to exclusionary practices in our industry.

Looking forward to three keys to our continued success: Compelling offerings; Access to customers and channels, And a winning business model.

We are optimistic this agreement addresses concerns about customer and channel access and our business model. We look forward to healthy competition with the mutual respect one would expect between world-class competitors.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091112/amd-ceo-dirk-meyers/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20091009/former-mysql-boss-to-ec-approve-oracle-sun-deal/ http://allthingsd.com/20091009/former-mysql-boss-to-ec-approve-oracle-sun-deal/#comments Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:32:08 +0000 John Paczkowski http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/?p=26338
Though he resigned earlier this year, former MySQL boss Mårten Mickos still has strong opinions about the open-source database outfit, which was acquired by Sun in 2008. In a letter to the European Commission Thursday, Mickos urged regulators to green-light Oracle’s (ORCL) takeover of Sun (JAVA), arguing that to delay it will only harm competition.

“Every new day of uncertainty is potentially very harmful to the various businesses of Sun, reducing competition in the market,” Mickos wrote. “A delay in the closing of this transaction is therefore only going to work against the respectable goal that you set out to achieve when launching the probe into this acquisition.”

Oracle, says Mickos, has far better reason to ramp-up Sun’s MySQL business than it does to harm it.

“Even if Oracle, for whatever reason, would have malicious or ignorant intent regarding MySQL (not that I think so), the positive and massive influence MySQL has on the DBMS market cannot be controlled by a single entity–not even by the owner of the MySQL assets. The users of MySQL exert a more powerful influence in the market than the owner does,” he continues. “Many expected Oracle to harm MySQL as far back as 2005, when they acquired the InnoDB storage engine that plays a crucial role for many MySQL customers. And yet Oracle increased their investment in InnoDB since that time, making MySQL a stronger player in the market.”

An interesting argument and one that appears to offer Mickos little personal gain. Now an entrepreneur in residence at Benchmark Capital, Mickos says he has no financial interest in the transaction. So why bother making it? “I couldn’t live with the fact that I’m not taking action,” Mickos told News.com.

Mickos’s letter will no doubt be welcomed by Oracle, which has repeatedly said it has only the best intentions for MySQL. “No, we’re not going to spin [MySQL] off,” Oracle CEO Larry Ellison told attendees of a Churchill Club event in Silicon Valley earlier this year. “We are keeping everything. We’re keeping tape. We’re keeping storage. We’re keeping x86 and SPARC. And we’re going to increase investment in all of them.”

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091009/former-mysql-boss-to-ec-approve-oracle-sun-deal/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20090922/oracle-mysql/ http://allthingsd.com/20090922/oracle-mysql/#comments Tue, 22 Sep 2009 14:30:31 +0000 John Paczkowski http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/?p=25210 Though some analysts claim otherwise, MySQL is an asset, not baggage, and Oracle has no plans to unload it. Nor does the company think it will be forced to win regulatory approval for its proposed purchase of Sun Microsystems.

“No, we’re not going to spin [MySQL] off,” Oracle CEO Larry Ellison told attendees of a Churchill Club event in Silicon Valley Monday evening. “We are keeping everything. We’re keeping tape. We’re keeping storage. We’re keeping x86 and SPARC. And we’re going to increase investment in all of them.”

In other words, technologists worried about Oracle’s (ORCL) intentions for MySQL and other Sun (JAVA) systems need to relax.

“Sun has fantastic technology. We think it’s got great microprocessor technology–it needs a little more investment, but we think it can be extremely competitive. It’s got the leading tape archival systems. We think the Open Storage on their new disk system is absolutely fantastic. Java speaks for itself. Solaris is overwhelmingly the best open-systems operating system on the planet….Sun has been a national treasure for the last couple of decades.”

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090922/oracle-mysql/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20090525/hints-of-a-new-market-for-cheap-power-sipping-servers/ http://allthingsd.com/20090525/hints-of-a-new-market-for-cheap-power-sipping-servers/#comments Mon, 25 May 2009 13:08:00 +0000 Don Clark http://voices.allthingsd.com/?p=12088 Netbooks are hot. Intel (INTC) estimates that the laptops–which can cost less than $300–sold faster in their first 12 months on the market than Apple’s (AAPL) iPhone or Nintendo’s Wii game console did. Could a similar low-end niche emerge in server systems?

It’s too early to tell, but there are some tantalizing signs–and some big ramifications if the trend takes hold.

First, some background: Hardware companies have long tried to convince customers to buy new machines that do computing work faster. Many customers in recent years have moved an increasing percentage of jobs away from “big iron”–mainframes and other servers that use proprietary circuitry–in favor of inexpensive servers based on the same x86 chip design used in PCs.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090525/hints-of-a-new-market-for-cheap-power-sipping-servers/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20090501/dell-should-buy-acer-bernstein-says/ http://allthingsd.com/20090501/dell-should-buy-acer-bernstein-says/#comments Fri, 01 May 2009 18:34:59 +0000 Eric Savitz http://voices.allthingsd.com/?p=11382 There has been speculation for months now that Dell (DELL) at some point will make a big acquisition. Most of the thinking has been about diversification moves. But Bernstein Research analyst Toni Sacconaghi proposes an idea that would boost Dell’s stake in the PC business: consider buying Acer.

In a research note today, Sacconaghi asserts that the PC sector is ripe for consolidation. He notes that the top 5 PC vendors accounted for 56 percent of industry units in 2008, and that the top 10 accounted for nearly 70 percent. Compare that, he suggests, with the x86 server market, where the top 5 players control more than 80 percent of the market, or the Unix server market, where the top 3 have more than 90 percent. It’s even lower than the high-def TV market, where the top 5 have 60 percent share, and the top 10 about 80 percent.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090501/dell-should-buy-acer-bernstein-says/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20080822/dell-gains-stand-out-as-server-sales-rise-122-percent/ http://allthingsd.com/20080822/dell-gains-stand-out-as-server-sales-rise-122-percent/#comments Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:19:28 +0000 Tiernan Ray http://voices.allthingsd.com/?p=2993 Worldwide server sales rose 12.2 percent, year over year, to 2.3 million units, in the second quarter, declares research firm Gartner (IT) in a note today, while revenue was up 5.7 percent for a total of $13.8 billion. The main driver was the replacement of x86 servers, a trend that began in the first quarter, notes Gartner, but the expansion of data centers backing Web sites was also an important factor, as was growth in emerging markets.

IBM (IBM) held onto the top revenue spot, with 31.2 percent of revenue, up 11.5 percent from last year’s 29.6 percent. HP’s (HPQ) share of the dollars, yen and shekels fell to 27.6 percent from 28.4 percent on 3 percent revenue growth.

Read the rest of this post

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20080822/dell-gains-stand-out-as-server-sales-rise-122-percent/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20080423/apple-pasemi/ http://allthingsd.com/20080423/apple-pasemi/#comments Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:44:58 +0000 John Paczkowski http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20080423/apple-pasemi/ Apple (AAPL) has finally found a worthy use for the more than $18 billion in cash and short-term securities gathering dust on its balance sheet. The company’s acquiring P.A. Semi for about $278 million in cash.

A boutique semiconductor design company, P.A. Semi specializes in super-low power PowerPC processors. It boasts a rock-star design team littered with Itanium, Opteron and UltraSparc veterans, led by Dan Dobberpuhl, who was among the lead designers on Digital Equipment’s Alpha and StrongARM chips. And in February of 2007, P.A. Semi uncrated its PWRficient 64-bit multicore processors, 2-gigahertz ARM chips that consume just 5 to 13 watts of power, making them 300% more efficient than any comparable chip.

An impressive chip. Question is, what does Apple want with the impressive little chip shop that made it? Perhaps the same thing it was looking for in 2005 when it first approached the company about a supply deal. That agreement never panned out and Apple subsequently signed up with Intel (INTC) and made transition to X86 chips. The switch has gone well. So well, that it seemed almost a foregone conclusion that Intel’s new line of Atom processors would end up in everything from the next generation iPhone to that mythical iTablet, Apple gaming console and next-gen Newton.

But perhaps that’s not the case. Perhaps Atom’s not quite to Apple’s liking? Perhaps, as word on the street has it, it failed to produce the kind of battery life that Apple wants for its ultra-portable designs. Perhaps Apple just wants its own in-house processor design team, one it could use to push its own technical innovations into the market.

Or perhaps P.A. Semi’s working on a new chip so insanely great that Apple CEO Steve Jobs felt compelled to acquire the company? More to follow when Apple reports earnings later today.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20080423/apple-pasemi/feed/ 1