Apple recruits top chip designer, IBM responds with suit

1235»

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by synp View Post


    The Russians, the British and the Norwegians, as well as the Iranians have lots of oil.




    Oil in the British sector of the North Sea probably peaked in 1999. The UK is now a net importer of crude oil and gas.
  • Reply 82 of 95
    mcdavemcdave Posts: 1,127member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Regardless of the panic inducing headlines... oil will be with us for a while longer.



    Worldwide oil production stats are irrelevant if it's distribution is hampered by political as well as economic agendas which engage it as currency to fouler ends. The case in point being the middle-east, their house isn't even built on sand, rather what's below it. Once they've failed in their current, desperate bid to transition their economy to high-end tourism, to prevent having their gonads in a western vice, they may wish to consider the lack of oil/abundance of sun and convenient high capital/low operational costs that solar plants offer. Not the classic type of technology enabler this rumour site tracks but I suspect there will be more solar farms in the UAE than the USA in the near future.



    McD
  • Reply 83 of 95
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by synp View Post


    The US produces 4 trillion kWh per year. If we add cars, and make them electric, that will grow. I don't have numbers, so let's assume that's 6 trillion kWh per year.



    1 square meter of photovoltaics can produce about 2 kWh per day, or 750 kWh per year. Now let's do some division.



    6,000,000,000,000 / 750 = 8,000,000,000. That's 8 billion square meters, or 2 million acres.



    Hmm, that's less than a square of 60 miles on a side. Humongous, but doable. You'd probably need about 50% more to accommodate inefficiencies in storage and transmission, but still....



    I started writing this post to show how this was all a pipe dream, but I guess the math does work.



    PV generation is mostly going on homes and buildings, now that the cost is dropping, and oil is high.



    There are environmental problems with using many square miles of desert. Even the Sahara has numerous animals and plants at times during the year.
  • Reply 84 of 95
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by McDave View Post


    Worldwide oil production stats are irrelevant if it's distribution is hampered by political as well as economic agendas which engage it as currency to fouler ends. The case in point being the middle-east, their house isn't even built on sand, rather what's below it. Once they've failed in their current, desperate bid to transition their economy to high-end tourism, to prevent having their gonads in a western vice, they may wish to consider the lack of oil/abundance of sun and convenient high capital/low operational costs that solar plants offer. Not the classic type of technology enabler this rumour site tracks but I suspect there will be more solar farms in the UAE than the USA in the near future.



    McD



    Russia is no better. They don't have the technology to extract oil from the biggest untapped fields in Northern Siberia. That's why they suckeres in the Western companies who do. But, in the end, they haven't gotten what they need.



    They are also proving themselves to be an unreliable supplier. It's driving some countries to nuclear.
  • Reply 85 of 95
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,213moderator
    This thread is skewing off into specifics about the current state of oil. The next step is usually political.



    IBM, Apple nor PaperMaster have anything remotely to do with oil. That discussion only arose due to the suggestion that measures such as preventing PaperMaster's work stifles innovation.



    Proving that this is or isn't the case with oil companies isn't going to have any bearing on this example.



    Assuming that PaperMaster is sent to work on Apple's servers and develop them to a better standard, IBM will still own the intellectual property for the designs of their servers. So anything that Apple makes that infringes on this IP can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.



    What else will this one employee do? Can he can single-handedly bring IBM to its knees? If so, there has to be a competing market Apple can do some serious damage in for IBM to be worried.



    He's a top chip engineer so could it be that he would be used to help push the Xeon chips forward? IBM pushed their server PPC chips over 5GHz. Possibly this could filter down into the Mac Pro. This would mean more for Intel than Apple though unless it was a custom chip built for Apple by Intel. Apple could then push their Xserves to compete with the high end but probably undercut them.



    If his destination is to work alongside the PA Semi group for mobile chips, then IBM have little to worry about because they would be going into Apple devices alone, which IBM wouldn't have a shot at anyway.
  • Reply 86 of 95
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    If his destination is to work alongside the PA Semi group for mobile chips, then IBM have little to worry about because they would be going into Apple devices alone, which IBM wouldn't have a shot at anyway.



    Unless IBM is working on products that are in the same area as Apples. Then a non- compete is exactly right in this situation.



    But none of us know. Only Apple, IBM, and Papermaster do (and their lawyers).
  • Reply 87 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kenaustus View Post


    So IBM offers this guy a major increase in his compensation as well as a year's pay if he stays and he still leaves. Why?



    If you want to really keep someone you increase compensation before they're ready to leave, not as a last minute effort.



    If you really want to keep someone you ensure they are in a job they love so much that they would never leave.



    Maybe IBM failed on both counts and Apple presented a future that got him excited again.



    Maybe he looked at his future with IBM and wasn't that excited.



    The fact that IBM failed to keep him says more about IBM than Apple. The way IBM handles this departure may well open other top people there to think about their options also.



    Solid post - strong points, well made: good thinking.
  • Reply 88 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BuffyzDead View Post


    Either it delays Apple's chip design; takes Apple's chip design in a potentially different direction than if Papermaster were involved; OR demonstrates that Apple's engineers were able to accomplish the same or better, without Papermaster.



    At any rate, it's all a moot point now that IBM has gone All Legal.



    At the rate those lawsuits get strung out, it will be a year from now before you know it, and things will play out.



    I meant to title this:

    Legally Papermaster will have to chill until Oct 25, 2009, not 08



    Not if there's no injunction.
  • Reply 89 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    I don't see how IBM and Apple are competitors given that Apple don't make processors. With iphone they use ARM, in their computers and servers, they use Intel. They don't compete in the high end server space so there's very little ground they compete on.



    I think this is the really important bit: the weaker their case for Apple as a competitor, the less likely that the court will offer IBM any relief - in which case, Papermaster could well work for Apple until a judgment is rendered in court...years from now.
  • Reply 90 of 95
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Capt. Obvious View Post


    I think this is the really important bit: the weaker their case for Apple as a competitor, the less likely that the court will offer IBM any relief - in which case, Papermaster could well work for Apple until a judgment is rendered in court...years from now.



    That's still assuming there is no injunction. Why would you assume that there isn't going to be one? There is a chance there will be one, depending on the laws and the contract in question.



    Just because they aren't direct competitors doesn't mean there isn't a risk of contamination of trade secrets, especially when the guy's a chip designer and it looks like he's going to be doing the same job.
  • Reply 91 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    That's still assuming there is no injunction. Why would you assume that there isn't going to be one? There is a chance there will be one, depending on the laws and the contract in question.



    Just because they aren't direct competitors doesn't mean there isn't a risk of contamination of trade secrets, especially when the guy's a chip designer and it looks like he's going to be doing the same job.



    I'm not assuming there won't be, just acknowledging the necessity of one to skunk the works. To gain an injunction, a preliminary claim of harm must be filed & ruled on: this will certainly involve an exchange of views between IBM & Apple before the bench. There is, as you say, always the chance, but Apple's legal team is good, and IBM would have to make a sound case that Apple couldn't impugn.



    Therefore, there might, in fact, be no injunction.
  • Reply 92 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Skepicus View Post


    I don't know why IBM is pursuing this. Non-competes are not enforceable in California, where Apple is based. Apple surely had that fact in mind when they hired the engineer.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-com..._of_California



    That is why the case was filed in New York, not California.
  • Reply 93 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by palegolas View Post


    Yeah, it's like saying: Hey, should you ever quit this company, consider your carrier over and start looking for a job as a janitor or something. None of your expertise you have developed during your employment here may be used in your further carrier. Good luck, sucker.



    You are making a very good point here, and one that has already been covered. Throw me a non-compete clause and I'll trump your clause with my right to work. I think that this will go away quickly and without any payments from Apple to IBM.



    Companies have lots of things in development, but they have to show that they were really going to market, not just making prototypes. There is a huge difference between research and going to market, and it is a dumb suit meant to convey the displeasure IBM must feel at having a 25 year employee just quit. Especially one that they thought they had, and actually should have, especially if he was offered a years salary as an incentive to just keep working. How many years could this guy been from retiring and, think about it, IBM was where he made his mark. It is really something to say the Apple lured him away, how many millions was this guys pension worth alone, along with the friends. Hey 25 years is a long time, and he had to be happy for some of that and he was very successful, way to go Apple!
  • Reply 94 of 95
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Capt. Obvious View Post


    Solid post - strong points, well made: good thinking.



    He made a good point, but that point isn't always valid.



    Not everyone leaves for money.



    It could also have been that he was doing what he did at IBM for so long, he was getting tired of it. Along comes Apple with a new direction for him, and he gets excited.



    IBM offers him a good deal of money, but he already has a good deal of money, so he still leaves.
  • Reply 95 of 95
    Papermaster making big moves with Jobs.

    The hobbies' passion overrides the paper and he feels young again, which is all kinds of good.

    Set your valley points people. It's time to buy.
Sign In or Register to comment.