There are reports of deliveries to Apple-selling stores of two types of boxes, one laptop sized and one bigger. Might the "laptop-sized" one actually hold new Xserves, given that laptops and Xserves have a similar form factor?
Holy crap man, have you ever seen an Xserve? An Xserve has the same form factor as a 50" Plasma TV. The box is huge - about four feet long.
Plus, nobody would stock many if any Xserves. They don't sell in any volume. That's not a hit on the Xserve, rather, it's a specialized item with a limited market, and with 3 models + BTO options, you'd be damn lucky to have what anyone wanted in stock.
I don't know if the translation is correct (saw it on Spymac) but this is a German invitation:
"APPLE Germany invites you in the heart of Europe to an event to steal your breath. Come to attend a satellite retransmission of Steve Jobs' opening keynote for the WWDC in San Francisco.
For the professionals in the Audio, Video, Publishing and Media, it will be an unforgettable event. Innovations await which will exceed your hopes regarding speed. Be ready for a new computer age on June 23, 2003... "
For those thinking that IBM will partner with Apple in the server market while Apple buys out SGI, here is the kind of thing that will put the two squarely at odds...
Here IBM is working specifically in the field that Apple is ostensibly focusing on. Here is a digital shop that is using Apple products (Shake) and is able to buy $5-million at a crack. Here is where IBM is pricing "aggressively." Anyone think IBM will let Apple crank out blades or big-iron servers to compete for these contracts? IBM gets money either way, but it is the service contracts and the long-term business relationships that give that market its best margins and stability.
You know I proposed a long time ago, that instead of Apple building their own "big iron" servers from scratch, that they may instead enter into a cooperative relationship with IBM. This would involve co-branded servers buildt by IBM sold by both Apple and IBM and "serviced" by IBM, but customized by Apple to the specialized markets and running OS-X. This makes a whole lot more sense to me, then Apple trying to get into the markets in competition with IBM. This way both parties stand to profit generously without either side having to invest in in additional resources that they don't currently have.
Of course maybe that is too simple of an idea to be popular.
...but it is the service contracts and the long-term business relationships that give that market its best margins and stability.
Exactly.
That is why Apple with it's Xserves or whatever is not going to run IBM, HP or SUn out of business anytime soon.
True, to macheads, nothing compares to Xserves or even inexpensive Linux/Xeon blades, but big contracts or large accounts usually measure up other factors - like service contracts, discounts and long term business relationships.
That is why Apple has much to benefit from the SGI brand and sales & marketing engine, if it wishes to persue the high end market.
And if it does, going it alone won't work.
Apple will spend more than SGI's $250 million price tag to establish customers, business relationships, not to mention establish its BRAND and sales and marketing teams at the high end.
Apple bought PowerSchool for $62 million (IMHO, not worth it).
Roxio will cost twice that at least...but online music business is a new and emerging market. It's up for grabs...if Apple wants to invest in it, it should be on getting a iTunes port out the door ASAP. Alternatively getting another Windows client to work with the iTunes Music Store web service. So Roxio IMHO is another UMG rumor.
SGI (actually depreciated since the last i looked) is now $230 million in market cap. Not even twice that of Roxio and half that of NeXT.
It is obvious that there will be some conflict of interest between IBM and SGI/Apple if Apple were to aquire them. However, IBM will benefit by the extending the market of the Power4 platform once SGI adopts it for Mac OS X workstations and possibly super servers.
Also i imagine that Apple/Steve Jobs will choose to focus SGI (or Silicon Graphics) on the media, graphics and 3D markets again.
That could only be good for IBM.
So perhaps IBM will lose out its (few) media, film and 3D customers to SGI, but will gain the (few) commercial IT, enterprise customers from SGI. That doesn't sound too bad to me.
IMHO there is a strong argument for Apple to aquire and direct SGI.
Although it would expand Apple's hardware business, i think it will be an important move in order to secure Apple's position in the media and 3D markets both at the low end and high end.
(Besides the $230 million price tag includes Alias|Wavefront which alone must be worth $100 million at least?)
You know I proposed a long time ago, that instead of Apple building their own "big iron" servers from scratch, that they may instead enter into a cooperative relationship with IBM. This would involve co-branded servers sold by both Apple and IBM and "serviced" by IBM, but customized by Apple to the specialized markets and running OS-X. This makes a whole lot more sense to me, then Apple trying to get into the markets in competition with IBM. This way both parties stand to profit generously without either side having to invest in in additional resources that they don't currently have.
Of course maybe that is too simple of an idea to be popular.
This idea makes a lot of sense for all parties involved. Though possibly too much sense for it to become a reality.
I don't know if the translation is correct (saw it on Spymac) but this is a German invitation:
"APPLE Germany invites you in the heart of Europe to an event to steal your breath. Come to attend a satellite retransmission of Steve Jobs' opening keynote for the WWDC in San Francisco.
For the professionals in the Audio, Video, Publishing and Media, it will be an unforgettable event. Innovations await which will exceed your hopes regarding speed. Be ready for a new computer age on June 23, 2003... "
New computer age, eh?
This is fairly significant if it's not a fabrication, but it doesn't seem like it's a fabrication at all really -- the use of melodramatic words is in Apple's style.
We could very well be looking at a "breath-robbing" day on the 23rd. Do you know how simply ecstatic Steve's got to be at this point? I mean, to know all this and to know that Macs will be on top again, without excuses! This is wonderful!! The audience is going to go crazy (with or without new hardware actually); for those of you privileged enough to go -- scream for us if there's good news. And if not, just kind of sulk for us, too.
You know I just thought of something. If Apple were NOT going to intro new hardware at WWDC wouldn't they just come out and say it? They did exactly that at Mac Expo Paris awhile back. It would be even easier to justify this time around as it is a "developer" conference. The press release would go something like this.
"Apple is looking forward to a great WWDC this year where we will showcase the stunning new OS X 10.3 Panther. Developers will receive advance copies to begin optimizing their software offerings. As we intend to concentrate on this milestone software achievement, we will not be introducing any new hardware products."
Steve knows the expectations have been sky high for weeks. If he wanted to throw cold water on the rumors he could. He's done it before, why not now???
I don't buy these rumors about myster boxes with "DO NOT OPEN" tags on them. Utter nonsense.
Imagine, working at a store with a corporate logo of an apple with a bite taken out of it. Then along comes some real forbidden fruit and nobody eats it? Yeah, right.
If Apple were shipping out Powermac G5 boxes with "do not open" tags, you can bet that someone, somewhere would rip that motherfscker open, fill a few flash cards with hot pics, and upload them to the internet faster than....well, pretty darn fast. Stores need display models, right? So a manager cracks open a box for the display model, keeps it locked in his office, no problem.
There are reports of deliveries to Apple-selling stores of two types of boxes, one laptop sized and one bigger. Might the "laptop-sized" one actually hold new Xserves, given that laptops and Xserves have a similar form factor?
Why so skeptical? If I remember correctly, this (or something similar) has happened in the past with iBooks. Remember when they introduced the 14" at MWSF? They already had them at the Apple Retail Stores and opened them up after the event.
There are reports of deliveries to Apple-selling stores of two types of boxes, one laptop sized and one bigger. Might the "laptop-sized" one actually hold new Xserves, given that laptops and Xserves have a similar form factor?
First of all, congratulations on not being stupid by calling them X-Serves or xServers or something equally incorrect. I am also confident that you would know that Apple's 3U RAID array product is the Xserve RAID as well, and not the Xraid or x-RAID or something also equally idiotic. People should not claim to be a fan if they don't even know the so-simple-my-dead-grandma-can-understand-it product name scheme.
If you look at the Xserve spec pages, they are 17.6" wide and 28" deep. In other words, that's about 5 and a quarter 12" PowerBooks. I have seen the laptop boxes, they are not oversized enough to contain an Xserve. However, the "eyewitness" may not know what he or she is seeing and may mistake an Xserve box for a laptop one, as the boxes are too narrow to be PowerMacs.
...that instead of Apple building their own "big iron" servers from scratch, that they may instead enter into a cooperative relationship with IBM. This would involve co-branded servers buildt by IBM sold by both Apple and IBM and "serviced" by IBM, but customized by Apple to the specialized markets and running OS-X.
Even if IBM were to purchase Apple and persue this it would be be difficult.
I know cos i've worked for both Apple and IBM.
IBM is an incredibly bureaucratic company.
It has much internal competition and conflict that sometimes hinders innovation. (Though the internal competition within IBM benefits customers. i.e they get better service and sometimes more than one bid/proposal from IBM for the same tender).
From IBM's point of view, there isn't much of a market for Mac OS X Servers and even if so, why should it contribute to a platform that would encroach on it's own AIX/Linux, OS/400 and pleathora of mainframe systems.
So i know this would never happen...or if it does it would hardly succeed.
This is not just about making Mac OS X servers...it's about producing high performance computing solutions for the media, 3D and film industry.
That is best served with a company capable of producing high performance hardware and software (Apple, Alias|Wavefront) and a brand and sales force capable of selling and supporting customers in that market (SGI).
For those thinking that IBM will partner with Apple in the server market while Apple buys out SGI, here is the kind of thing that will put the two squarely at odds...
Here IBM is working specifically in the field that Apple is ostensibly focusing on. Here is a digital shop that is using Apple products (Shake) and is able to buy $5-million at a crack. Here is where IBM is pricing "aggressively." Anyone think IBM will let Apple crank out blades or big-iron servers to compete for these contracts? IBM gets money either way, but it is the service contracts and the long-term business relationships that give that market its best margins and stability.
If Apple wanted SGI's assets they would have made their move a year or so ago, when SGI stock was selling for $.50 a share. Your link to the Weta purchase, MacGregor shows the complimentary relationship that can exist between Apple and IBM.
Shaktai, as you said:
Quote:
... instead of Apple building their own "big iron" servers from scratch, that they may instead enter into a cooperative relationship with IBM.
I can definitely see a cooperative relationship between Apple and IBM, but "co-branded servers built by IBM sold by both Apple and IBM and "serviced" by IBM", Are unlikly, unless IBM's blade server chassis has a sticker on it saying "OSX inside". IBM doesn't need Apple's help to build and sell big iron. But offering and supporting yet another operating system option to it's customer base could be a win for both IBM and Apple.
~ It already runs on xx86 and would make a great hedge for the Linux IBM servers in light of all the M$-SCO FUD. Regardless of the merits, the case will be drug out (with M$'s money) for years. A Gartner report recommends holding off on Linux until the issues are resolved.
Think about it. IBM offers Windows, AIX and Linux now on their hardware, adding Darwin support and development would give their customers more choice, and a way to avoid the epic M$~proxy attacks on Linux for the rest of the decade.
Partner with IBM on OSX Server
Taking the IBM~Apple partnering to it's logical conclusion would bring OSX Panther, server version only, to IBM hardware, with Marklar versions for the xx86 crowd.
Partner with IBM on Aqua ~ lite
IBM could build the minimalist desktops and thin clients for the Fortune 500, perhaps with a licensed version of Aqua as a front end, but without the iApps. IBM could then port their own applications and office suite to their own chips (970's assumed).
As for Apple, having IBM's endorsement will open the doors to the Fortune 5000 and create a level playing field in business accounts with M$FT for the first time. Choice is a good thing.
Not SF, but the place to be in Europe, when the 970 roll in, after Steve's keynote....
In Europe? What no satellite feeds in Paris, UK or elsewhere?
What about Tokyo? IIRC Japan alone accounts for more Mac sales than all of Europe.
Why Berlin? What's the tie-in? Are they announcing a German localized Panther? Is some German company respobsible for one of the products to be unveiled?
If Apple wanted SGI's assets they would have made their move a year or so ago, when SGI stock was selling for $.50 a share.
It's not just about share price and market capitalization. SGI was bleeding money, it had yet to clean up its strategy, that is release Linux/Itanium servers and to cull non strategic business units (like Cray).
Also Apple wasn't in a position to aquire SGI.
The transition to Mac OS X was still incomplete, Apple's PowerPC processors lagging behind Intel's and Apple was in the red.
This is not to mention the gloomy economic climate.
Now things are looking up, both companies are in the red and...
Also it wasn't clear on what processor architecture SGI would support Mac OS X:
1. Itanium? Too hot, too expensive. And not compatible with Mac OS X software.
2. MIPS? legacy, dated and still not compatible with Mac OS X apps.
3. PowerPC G4? Too slow. And little to differentiate between Apple PowerMacs.
With the arrival of the 64-bit PPC970 and the 64-bit Mac OS X and HyperTransport, Apple and SGI now have a platform on which to produce high performance 4-8 or 8-16 way workstations.
Comments
Originally posted by thegelding
...is this the heavy moki mentions...
Ya know g, the bases on those new adjustable Cinema Displays are going to be pretty damn heavy as well...even heavier than pscates' lamp base.
Originally posted by qazII
There are reports of deliveries to Apple-selling stores of two types of boxes, one laptop sized and one bigger. Might the "laptop-sized" one actually hold new Xserves, given that laptops and Xserves have a similar form factor?
Holy crap man, have you ever seen an Xserve? An Xserve has the same form factor as a 50" Plasma TV. The box is huge - about four feet long.
Plus, nobody would stock many if any Xserves. They don't sell in any volume. That's not a hit on the Xserve, rather, it's a specialized item with a limited market, and with 3 models + BTO options, you'd be damn lucky to have what anyone wanted in stock.
Originally posted by MajorMatt
How can 970s not be released?
Because they have something else up their sleeve and the PM970 won't be availble until CreativePro nee MacWorld?
Maybe Apple's going to announce an entertainment center based on a Tivo box and a Studio display?
Or maybe just a humongous display? Who knows? A week will tell.
"APPLE Germany invites you in the heart of Europe to an event to steal your breath. Come to attend a satellite retransmission of Steve Jobs' opening keynote for the WWDC in San Francisco.
For the professionals in the Audio, Video, Publishing and Media, it will be an unforgettable event. Innovations await which will exceed your hopes regarding speed. Be ready for a new computer age on June 23, 2003... "
New computer age, eh?
Originally posted by MacGregor
For those thinking that IBM will partner with Apple in the server market while Apple buys out SGI, here is the kind of thing that will put the two squarely at odds...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/b...ection=general
Here IBM is working specifically in the field that Apple is ostensibly focusing on. Here is a digital shop that is using Apple products (Shake) and is able to buy $5-million at a crack. Here is where IBM is pricing "aggressively." Anyone think IBM will let Apple crank out blades or big-iron servers to compete for these contracts? IBM gets money either way, but it is the service contracts and the long-term business relationships that give that market its best margins and stability.
You know I proposed a long time ago, that instead of Apple building their own "big iron" servers from scratch, that they may instead enter into a cooperative relationship with IBM. This would involve co-branded servers buildt by IBM sold by both Apple and IBM and "serviced" by IBM, but customized by Apple to the specialized markets and running OS-X. This makes a whole lot more sense to me, then Apple trying to get into the markets in competition with IBM. This way both parties stand to profit generously without either side having to invest in in additional resources that they don't currently have.
Of course maybe that is too simple of an idea to be popular.
Originally posted by MacGregor
...but it is the service contracts and the long-term business relationships that give that market its best margins and stability.
Exactly.
That is why Apple with it's Xserves or whatever is not going to run IBM, HP or SUn out of business anytime soon.
True, to macheads, nothing compares to Xserves or even inexpensive Linux/Xeon blades, but big contracts or large accounts usually measure up other factors - like service contracts, discounts and long term business relationships.
That is why Apple has much to benefit from the SGI brand and sales & marketing engine, if it wishes to persue the high end market.
And if it does, going it alone won't work.
Apple will spend more than SGI's $250 million price tag to establish customers, business relationships, not to mention establish its BRAND and sales and marketing teams at the high end.
Apple bought PowerSchool for $62 million (IMHO, not worth it).
Roxio will cost twice that at least...but online music business is a new and emerging market. It's up for grabs...if Apple wants to invest in it, it should be on getting a iTunes port out the door ASAP. Alternatively getting another Windows client to work with the iTunes Music Store web service. So Roxio IMHO is another UMG rumor.
SGI (actually depreciated since the last i looked) is now $230 million in market cap. Not even twice that of Roxio and half that of NeXT.
It is obvious that there will be some conflict of interest between IBM and SGI/Apple if Apple were to aquire them. However, IBM will benefit by the extending the market of the Power4 platform once SGI adopts it for Mac OS X workstations and possibly super servers.
Also i imagine that Apple/Steve Jobs will choose to focus SGI (or Silicon Graphics) on the media, graphics and 3D markets again.
That could only be good for IBM.
So perhaps IBM will lose out its (few) media, film and 3D customers to SGI, but will gain the (few) commercial IT, enterprise customers from SGI. That doesn't sound too bad to me.
IMHO there is a strong argument for Apple to aquire and direct SGI.
Although it would expand Apple's hardware business, i think it will be an important move in order to secure Apple's position in the media and 3D markets both at the low end and high end.
(Besides the $230 million price tag includes Alias|Wavefront which alone must be worth $100 million at least?)
Originally posted by Shaktai
You know I proposed a long time ago, that instead of Apple building their own "big iron" servers from scratch, that they may instead enter into a cooperative relationship with IBM. This would involve co-branded servers sold by both Apple and IBM and "serviced" by IBM, but customized by Apple to the specialized markets and running OS-X. This makes a whole lot more sense to me, then Apple trying to get into the markets in competition with IBM. This way both parties stand to profit generously without either side having to invest in in additional resources that they don't currently have.
Of course maybe that is too simple of an idea to be popular.
This idea makes a lot of sense for all parties involved. Though possibly too much sense for it to become a reality.
Hypertransport demo
Panther demo
The 'boxes' showing up at apple stores are speed bumped 15.4 inch powerbooks
The 'mystery' boxes are promotional materials for panther
Read: a buzz kill
Originally posted by Bioflavonoid
I don't know if the translation is correct (saw it on Spymac) but this is a German invitation:
"APPLE Germany invites you in the heart of Europe to an event to steal your breath. Come to attend a satellite retransmission of Steve Jobs' opening keynote for the WWDC in San Francisco.
For the professionals in the Audio, Video, Publishing and Media, it will be an unforgettable event. Innovations await which will exceed your hopes regarding speed. Be ready for a new computer age on June 23, 2003... "
New computer age, eh?
This is fairly significant if it's not a fabrication, but it doesn't seem like it's a fabrication at all really -- the use of melodramatic words is in Apple's style.
We could very well be looking at a "breath-robbing" day on the 23rd. Do you know how simply ecstatic Steve's got to be at this point? I mean, to know all this and to know that Macs will be on top again, without excuses! This is wonderful!! The audience is going to go crazy (with or without new hardware actually); for those of you privileged enough to go -- scream for us if there's good news. And if not, just kind of sulk for us, too.
"Apple is looking forward to a great WWDC this year where we will showcase the stunning new OS X 10.3 Panther. Developers will receive advance copies to begin optimizing their software offerings. As we intend to concentrate on this milestone software achievement, we will not be introducing any new hardware products."
Steve knows the expectations have been sky high for weeks. If he wanted to throw cold water on the rumors he could. He's done it before, why not now???
Imagine, working at a store with a corporate logo of an apple with a bite taken out of it. Then along comes some real forbidden fruit and nobody eats it? Yeah, right.
If Apple were shipping out Powermac G5 boxes with "do not open" tags, you can bet that someone, somewhere would rip that motherfscker open, fill a few flash cards with hot pics, and upload them to the internet faster than....well, pretty darn fast. Stores need display models, right? So a manager cracks open a box for the display model, keeps it locked in his office, no problem.
No G5 Powermacs at WWDC.
Originally posted by qazII
There are reports of deliveries to Apple-selling stores of two types of boxes, one laptop sized and one bigger. Might the "laptop-sized" one actually hold new Xserves, given that laptops and Xserves have a similar form factor?
displays
PowerMacs
next question...
Originally posted by qazII
There are reports of deliveries to Apple-selling stores of two types of boxes, one laptop sized and one bigger. Might the "laptop-sized" one actually hold new Xserves, given that laptops and Xserves have a similar form factor?
First of all, congratulations on not being stupid by calling them X-Serves or xServers or something equally incorrect. I am also confident that you would know that Apple's 3U RAID array product is the Xserve RAID as well, and not the Xraid or x-RAID or something also equally idiotic. People should not claim to be a fan if they don't even know the so-simple-my-dead-grandma-can-understand-it product name scheme.
If you look at the Xserve spec pages, they are 17.6" wide and 28" deep. In other words, that's about 5 and a quarter 12" PowerBooks. I have seen the laptop boxes, they are not oversized enough to contain an Xserve. However, the "eyewitness" may not know what he or she is seeing and may mistake an Xserve box for a laptop one, as the boxes are too narrow to be PowerMacs.
Originally posted by Shaktai
...that instead of Apple building their own "big iron" servers from scratch, that they may instead enter into a cooperative relationship with IBM. This would involve co-branded servers buildt by IBM sold by both Apple and IBM and "serviced" by IBM, but customized by Apple to the specialized markets and running OS-X.
Even if IBM were to purchase Apple and persue this it would be be difficult.
I know cos i've worked for both Apple and IBM.
IBM is an incredibly bureaucratic company.
It has much internal competition and conflict that sometimes hinders innovation. (Though the internal competition within IBM benefits customers. i.e they get better service and sometimes more than one bid/proposal from IBM for the same tender).
From IBM's point of view, there isn't much of a market for Mac OS X Servers and even if so, why should it contribute to a platform that would encroach on it's own AIX/Linux, OS/400 and pleathora of mainframe systems.
So i know this would never happen...or if it does it would hardly succeed.
This is not just about making Mac OS X servers...it's about producing high performance computing solutions for the media, 3D and film industry.
That is best served with a company capable of producing high performance hardware and software (Apple, Alias|Wavefront) and a brand and sales force capable of selling and supporting customers in that market (SGI).
Originally posted by Bioflavonoid
I don't know if the translation is correct (saw it on Spymac) but this is a German invitation:
and here a pic of the 'Adlon Palais'-room....
Not SF, but the place to be in Europe, when the 970 roll in, after Steve's keynote....
Originally posted by MacGregor:
For those thinking that IBM will partner with Apple in the server market while Apple buys out SGI, here is the kind of thing that will put the two squarely at odds...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...section=general
Here IBM is working specifically in the field that Apple is ostensibly focusing on. Here is a digital shop that is using Apple products (Shake) and is able to buy $5-million at a crack. Here is where IBM is pricing "aggressively." Anyone think IBM will let Apple crank out blades or big-iron servers to compete for these contracts? IBM gets money either way, but it is the service contracts and the long-term business relationships that give that market its best margins and stability.
If Apple wanted SGI's assets they would have made their move a year or so ago, when SGI stock was selling for $.50 a share. Your link to the Weta purchase, MacGregor shows the complimentary relationship that can exist between Apple and IBM.
Shaktai, as you said:
... instead of Apple building their own "big iron" servers from scratch, that they may instead enter into a cooperative relationship with IBM.
I can definitely see a cooperative relationship between Apple and IBM, but "co-branded servers built by IBM sold by both Apple and IBM and "serviced" by IBM", Are unlikly, unless IBM's blade server chassis has a sticker on it saying "OSX inside". IBM doesn't need Apple's help to build and sell big iron. But offering and supporting yet another operating system option to it's customer base could be a win for both IBM and Apple.
In this thread I made the following points:
Partner with IBM on Darwin
~ It already runs on xx86 and would make a great hedge for the Linux IBM servers in light of all the M$-SCO FUD. Regardless of the merits, the case will be drug out (with M$'s money) for years. A Gartner report recommends holding off on Linux until the issues are resolved.
Think about it. IBM offers Windows, AIX and Linux now on their hardware, adding Darwin support and development would give their customers more choice, and a way to avoid the epic M$~proxy attacks on Linux for the rest of the decade.
Partner with IBM on OSX Server
Taking the IBM~Apple partnering to it's logical conclusion would bring OSX Panther, server version only, to IBM hardware, with Marklar versions for the xx86 crowd.
Partner with IBM on Aqua ~ lite
IBM could build the minimalist desktops and thin clients for the Fortune 500, perhaps with a licensed version of Aqua as a front end, but without the iApps. IBM could then port their own applications and office suite to their own chips (970's assumed).
As for Apple, having IBM's endorsement will open the doors to the Fortune 5000 and create a level playing field in business accounts with M$FT for the first time. Choice is a good thing.
Aphelion ...
Originally posted by reactor
Not SF, but the place to be in Europe, when the 970 roll in, after Steve's keynote....
In Europe? What no satellite feeds in Paris, UK or elsewhere?
What about Tokyo? IIRC Japan alone accounts for more Mac sales than all of Europe.
Why Berlin? What's the tie-in? Are they announcing a German localized Panther? Is some German company respobsible for one of the products to be unveiled?
Why Berlin?
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
Why Berlin?
Because Germany is the third largest economy worldwide. Consequently webcasts to special VIP events in Tokyo and Berlin.
Originally posted by Aphelion
If Apple wanted SGI's assets they would have made their move a year or so ago, when SGI stock was selling for $.50 a share.
It's not just about share price and market capitalization. SGI was bleeding money, it had yet to clean up its strategy, that is release Linux/Itanium servers and to cull non strategic business units (like Cray).
Also Apple wasn't in a position to aquire SGI.
The transition to Mac OS X was still incomplete, Apple's PowerPC processors lagging behind Intel's and Apple was in the red.
This is not to mention the gloomy economic climate.
Now things are looking up, both companies are in the red and...
Also it wasn't clear on what processor architecture SGI would support Mac OS X:
1. Itanium? Too hot, too expensive. And not compatible with Mac OS X software.
2. MIPS? legacy, dated and still not compatible with Mac OS X apps.
3. PowerPC G4? Too slow. And little to differentiate between Apple PowerMacs.
With the arrival of the 64-bit PPC970 and the 64-bit Mac OS X and HyperTransport, Apple and SGI now have a platform on which to produce high performance 4-8 or 8-16 way workstations.
So now would be a good time