CEOs Of The Motherboard Market Talk Shop
k-hell writes "An interesting piece from AnandTech: 'What do you get when you gather 13 of the most influential CEOs in the motherboard market? An excellent avenue to understand where this industry is headed. Find out what the heads of the motherboard industry think about everything from AMD's Opteron to the future of the worldwide economy in our first quarterly CEO Forum.'"
CEOs are not the visionaries, generally - what would be far more interesting would be to gather some of the leading engineers from these companies, and ask them how they thought the market would progress over the next few years.
A geek Royal Rumble?
all those questions and they didn't ask them whether they were going to be more Linux friendly with their motherboards...
What we really want is proper manufacturers' drivers for all the chipsets on the board, included on the CD that comes with the motherboard.
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
The problem with assuming that the motherboard CEOs are going to be driving the market is that it misses the fact that there are so many. This happens in commodity markets which become well understood and have a relatively low R&D expense. Higher levels of R&D (for instance graphics cards) mean less competition and higher turnover of companies. The motherboard people provide a required commodity in a computer that is a bit more complex that the power supply, but it is not what will drive the industry forwards.
These are followers, not leaders, of the industry. Just because they plug-in other peoples processors to specs created by those other people does not mean that they innovate the market. Its an interesting read from people who can see their part of the market, but it doesn't give a roadmap for the longer term.
Now what I'd like to see would be a closed room discussion with CCTV cameras between, Jobs, Ellison, Gates and McNeally.... with knives. THAT would tell you which way the market was going
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
It's getting to the point that having everything on-board on the MoBo is actually a good idea. They are cheap, and despensible. If something goes wrong, you simply swap out the board and you end up getting an upgrade to the rest of the components in the processes. At this point, with all-in-one boards becomming more and more speciallized like the nForce from nVidia, it's starting to look like the PC is becomming more console like in nature. As for the gaming consoles of today, we can just look at the PS2. It's platform can function as a PC basically with the added network interface and USB ports. And the GameCube is basically a mini Apple. It has an IBM CPU with ATI graphics. If it had any more memory, it could prolly run OSX. Basically, each generation the line between what defines PC and Console blur more and more.
Life is not for the lazy.
Will you continue to save 2 cents per board by using cheap electrolytic capacitors that leak after 12 months' use?
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
I basically copy and paste the article summary from the front page as a weak attempt at humour (I have flu so it's also my best shot) and someone mods it as interesting.
It seems people don't even read the front page anymore!
"Proudly Posting Without Reading The Article"
I find it interesting that CEO#5 on question 1 refers to "clone market". This term used to be popular when the "real" PC was IBM and the cheap Taiwanese compatibles were "clones" but it's been a long time since I last heard anyone refer to a generic PC as a "clone".
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
"What do you get when you gather 13 of the most influential CEOs in the motherboard market? "
A cartel?
Bet you any money they still won't be able to produce laptop-sized motherboards for sale to the general public - presumably to ensure that you can't get a decent laptop for less than £1300.
(a) all of these vendors are ultimately competitors. surely the things they will publicly agree on as "good/bad/whatever" will be agreed on because it is the lowest common denominator, blindingly obvious, or otherwise something that does not give away internal development hints nor affect the bottom line (b) all of these vendors are ultimately in thrall to the one big kahuna of the motherboard industry, Intel. By this I don't mean in terms of motherboards shipped (even though Intel does ship a whole lot) - I mean in terms of the CPUs used and the chipsets supplied. Which one of these CEOs is going to give the skinny on strong-arm-elbow-twisting, e.g. anti-VIA action, etc.? The CEO that is shorting his own stock, that's who. So they DO talk some about Intel (Nvidia's interactions etc.) - what's it really worth? Are they REALLy telling you the inside news? (c) historically industry predictions have always been fucked up. One big reason why Moore's "law" is repeatedly cited is because it's one of the few predictions that came out more-or-less true: where are our flying cars, robot helpers, etc? nowhere, that's where. "motherboards will get smaller". Excellent prediction, Sherlock. Let me predict another: the model numbers will increment. This kind of "news" is the kind of pap that rubbish news/journos push out, like how all those articles trumpeting the impact of the dotcoms right up until the bubble burst.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD LEARN TO USE PARAGRAPHS
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah