Slashdot Mirror
Intel Warns Asia Over Linux Plan
rimbaldi writes "Intel's CEO, Craig Barrett recently warned the Chinese government that their attempt to create regional standards for computers and communications, including standards using Linux-based software, may be doomed to failure, since 'such a strategy might protect local companies and markets in the short term, [but] it would make it more difficult for Asian companies to participate in world markets.' This is in reaction to earlier Slashdot-covered stories about an Asian software consortium and China disallowing foreign software."
If there was any doubt that Microsoft all but owns Intel, let it be resolved now.
who woulda thought that this was Intel's stance on the position? China subsidizing the Dragon chip doesn't make Intel that happy.
Bill Gates resumed Craig Barrett's weekly allowance.
Nosce te Ipsum
I mean.. who would want to lock himself into a market consisting of 1/8 of the world population!?.. ;) .. Gimme a break.. had it been Bulgaria or Sweden okay.. but China.. GL HF Intel!
it is just really funny to see a multinational company watching out for the interests of one the largest potential new markets by stating that they won't be able to compete ten to twenty years from now. FUD.
a slut did tulsa
the Internet will never work with open standards. That's just crazy talk. Crazy!
Is Intel pushing MS Windows now?
Intel > procs and chipsets > DRM > MS Windows
It's funny how Intel is saying that China would be creating "Proprietary" standards. Umm... how can they be proprietary if they're open source and built on linux? They won't be so "proprietary" if everyone can see their standards and work on interoperability... I would see this as more beneficial than locking themselves on closed proprietary systems. (albeit they are more widely used)
---- Move SIG...For great justice!
Anyone suprised?
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
What they've feared most: all developing nations that are short on cash but have plenty of talent and labor, creating their own OS's and hardware architectures, leaving Craig and Bill out of the loop with empty pockets.
Last time it was M$ not getting its share with the OS consortium, now it's hardware. Soon they'll have a complete system...
Furthermore,
... China's own attempts at a cpu. With Linux and a good plan, these nations will only be a recompile away from ditching Intel.
I know, Linux machines use intel processors, too. But unless I'm mistaken, intel and MS are pretty closely aligned. It doesn't seem like a very unbiased party, hence the analogy.
philcrissman.com.
How about he explains why they wouldn't be able to take part of the global market?
Treehugger? Treehugger... Treehugger!
Lets see, at ~$150 saved per PC without Windows, times about 2 Billion PC's... Buys one hell of alot of "lets go participate in world markets".
And if you skip the "Intel inside" you can double that savings easily.
Yet again more asian long-term thinking at work.
- Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
Anyway, that's my two cents. You can go back to running around in circles while waving your arms and shrieking about Microsoft now...;-)
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
This isn't an anti-Linux stance. It's a stance against customizing everything for China. Linux just makes it easier to do. The warning is for China not to close themselves off from the rest of the world by creating a proprietary OS, apps, etc. Wow. China being insular. Who would have thunk it?
Isn't just that there are so many of them.
The great thing about standards, and having "open" systems, is that everybody is on fair ground. Why does Red Hat and Suse outsell their competition? Is it because they have some "secret extra" that locks in their customers?
Well, no (at least not for the most part). It's because of the other things they bring to support the standard, such as service, support, upgrades, developing to add to what has been done to make the "standard" easier to use.
So if China wants to base their software on Linux, more power to them - as long as they obey the GPL. If they make an improvement to make it easier to use Chinese characters on the command line, great - release it to everybody else. If they make a processor that works like Intel and they want to make it public, have a good time.
So I disagree with Mr. Barrett in principle that using regional standards is a "bad" thing - as long as those standards are published, realized by everybody, and don't have any hidden "gotchas".
What China will have to remember is the great thing about standards - there are so many of them. They (and by this I mean China's oppressive communist government) might think of some great standards, like "electrocute religious dissodents if they touch a computer". Or "file encryption systems must have a government backdoor at any time".
Because the rest of the world might not want to use that particular standard in their stuff. And if you have 75% of the world not using your standard, you either have to a) say you don't care (and make Mr. Barrett right), b) modify your standard, or c) join the rest of the world.
And if it turns out they're just taking the intellectual property of others - including Linux and yes, Intel - and not returning it to the group, they'll find that people will not be as interested in playing in their sandbox.
So have fun, China, and I hope to see some interesting new standards. I actually wish you luck if you decide you want to make your own processors and software, and if you truly want to make both open for all to use, have a good time.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
that keeps the world from being united under a truly open computing standard. West competes with east. East competes with west. At this rate we're gonna be doomed for the rest of eternity on this big blue rock and we'll never pull together and blast off into space to colonize other worlds so our species survives even after our star goes supernova in several billion years. [/endrant]
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
If China/Asia decides their own course of technology specific to there needs, would the rest of the world not try to interoperate? I mean there's over a billion people there!
Would it not be prudent to have technology that works the way they need it to, instead of accepting whatever multinationals decide is good enough for them?
And anyhow if it's based on open standards, will it not be easier to interoperate with them anyhow??
I think the statement is more about protecting Intel's interests (i.e. selling chips), then what's "good for asia"
USA = 200-300 million people (approx)
Europe = 200-300 million people (approx)
China = more than 1000 million people
So, who is the "rest of the world"?
Intel has been very friendly to Linux in the past, and for good reason. Linux provides a means for Intel to take market share away from the likes of Sun and HP. Why buy a non-Intel server when you can do the job just fine with an Intel-based Linux server? (True for many tasks, debatable for others.)
On the other hand, Intel has much to fear from Linux. If there were a large enough market that didn't care about Windows, then it would become practical for Linux users to question whey they should run on an expensive Intel chip instead of a cheaper non-x86 CPU from another vendor. The lock-in to the instruction set would be gone. Intel would have to compete head-to-head with MIPS and the likes in the desktop market, not something they want to do.
Or it would be, if nobody like the Chinese got uppity. Planning to go with non-TCPA software is certainly Not Part of the Plan, and could derail all of Intel's plans.
That just can't be allowed now, can it?
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Today, the majority DVD player now support VCD, SVCD (which have NO DRM whatsoever) and MP3s (bonus). DiVX;-) support is just starting to appear. I betcha by XMAS the 'de facto' player will list DVD,SVCD,VCD,DiVX,WMA,MP3 compatibility (and OGG too hopefully).
Simple marketing: Q: "How do we get all those people with DVD players to spend money on a new one this Xmas?" A: Release a new line with new ATTRACTIVE features.
I just read the whole article (no, I'm not new here) and it sounds to me like Intel is just telling China not to create proprietary regional standards that will not interoperate with the rest of the world. No mention of "don't use Linux" or "use microsoft and be happy", so off with the tin foil hats.
The interesting thought exercise is what happens if China and their massive population suddenly get their act together and emerge as a technological powerhouse? Then they can tell intel to conform to their standards or risk losing a giant revenue stream.
Finkployd
Yes, they really should stop speaking Chinese there too. Don't they know that the rest of the world speaks English.
With a population of 2 billion people. China is a 200lb gorilla, and everyone knows it. If China, with rest of Asia went 'standard' or 'non-standard', whatever they choose- with that much weight to throw around- it will become a STANDARD. Intel and M$ knows this and are warning off.
In the short-term it may be good for Asia, in the long-term it will be good for Asia, because instead of Asian companies trying to be compatible with US/European standards, it will be the other way around.
Even with a measily 10% of population using computers in China (if in the future that should happen), it would larger then the WHOLE U.S. population.
200lb gorilla indeed.
short term : chinese jobs are protected
middle term : West is implementing trusted,drm compliant, whatever systems. China cannot sell (unlawful material, because open)
long term : illegality considered illegal barrier to trade by wto. West can use free chinese programs/systems. Intel & Microsoft become irrelevants
One can always dream...
It's interesting to notice the difference in focus between Craig Barrett's statements and the Slashdot's focus.
Barrett is an executive at Intel. His primary concern is whether the Chinese or the Indians will succeed with localizing microprocessor design. Needless to say, he is predisposed to believe that these efforts should not be undertaken.
Here on Slashdot, the primary focus is the various attempts taking place in Asia to standardize around Linux. From my own perspective, I don't think that this effort is logically equivalent to the Barrett's hardware example. I don't see the effort at promoting Linux as an attempt to fork the code base, but rather an effort to unify the development community around a single standard. With luck, this effort will result in better contributions to the core Linux code base.
And of course Intel welcomes the Chinese production of high-quality, low-cost computer chips.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
We intend to lock people into proprietary formats, preferably DRM encumbered so we may legally keep others from creating compatible programs or import filters so you can use alternative OSs.
Microsoft is working very hard to keep there from being a "critical mass" of people using alternatives, so that everyone "muat" buy Windows/Office because that's what everybody else uses. Once people start expecting compatibility with "everyone", where everyone includes Linux, the game is already half lost. Regardless of whether they actually use Linux at that time, Microsoft doesn't want to give that alternative, simply because it hurts those running Linux who can't communicate properly with Windows users far more than the other way around.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Heh.
Heh-heh.
So, Mr. Barrett, was the last time this sort of thing has been tried in a locale of 1.2 billion people?
Basically, Intel is scared. If this takes off, Intel will suffer dearly in a market that currently generates 3.2 billion dollars of revenue for them. Roughly 12% of their total revenue comes from China alone.
You'll forgive me, Mr. Barrett, if I have trouble keeping a straight face.
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
Does intel think that they are going to tell china, "you are going to fail".
If china wants to develop for a different platform. Its their choice. If they also want to develop on a different processor then what intel offers then that is their choice. Personally I like it. If china/asain succeed's not only will they have a nice platform (hopefully) They will have a cpu that isn't pulled down by all hacks to make it modern.. I Say 'Hey china go ahead'.
Why should china put money into other country's when it can put it into their own.
Really I think intel just wants money. But their solution is just a hack for backword compatibilty.
Theres really a point where backword compatbility stifles things.
(the itanium is nice tho, since its not x86 based.)
I will shutup before I get too offtopic.
...when a big American corporation feels that they can go ahead and issue warnings to the freakin' government of China, that might just inadvertently send the signal that the government is doing the right thing in attempting to prevent becoming beholden to "standards" that are largely controlled by big American corporations...
Except for writing my new book (my publisher supplied me with Word macros that I must use), I find this $199 PC with SuSE Linux to provide a super productive environment! When I get time to get back to work on my own products next December, my cheap Chineese PC meets all my needs (in my case, this is running Java JDK, ant, IntelliJ, Tomcat, Joram JMS, JBoss, etc.) I have to love low overhead and a $199 computer is a sweet price point that an Intel based machine would have a difficult time meeting.
Off course I expect noise like this from Intel!
Intel likes globalization when it favors them :-)
-Mark
But, even if China does create new silicon and computing hardware, the input data and output information can still conform to international standards (ASCII, HTML, etc.) Just because the information was created without profitting Intel or AMD hardware sales does not make the information bad.
I understand he wants to protect potential profits from selling $billions of Intel hardware to China, but this FUD about incompatible standards doesn't cut it. Even if China were to make their own silicon, I'm sure a few patches to gcc would make their C++ code compile just fine for their new hardware. If China finds a way to make it (faster, cheaper, better; choose two) than what is available from current vendors, then they should make it.
One of the reasons that Open-Hardware is not generally available is the large cost of generating the silicon, and the logistics of distributing the hardware worldwide at a reasonable price. But if China is funding the fab factories, a key barrier is removed; and that should scare the beancounters at CPU manufacturers.
I agree that the headline of the Financial Times is grossly misleading, but for fewer reasons: simply because none of the quotes from Barrett even mention Linux, so there's no reason to believe he isn't just talking about the asian CPU plans.
Even if you didn't read the rest of the article, it's clear he's talking about "proprietary standards," which linux clearly is not.
Here, however, I'm not so sure. Just because something is "clearly" true to you, me, or anyone else capable of handling a dictionary and boolean logic doesn't mean it's necessarily clear to a business executive. Have you read Darl McBride's open letter? Jonathan Schwartz's eWeek interview? Perhaps Craig Barrett has also fallen into this expanding black hole from whence no rational thought can escape.
It worked nicely for Intel and Microsoft. This is exactly why these companies dominate their markets. They have forced standards. They are doing the same thing now by forcing DRM on consumers (and YES, DRM will be forced..just watch).
So instead, Barrett expects Asia to allow Intel and Microsoft to create standards for them? Zzzzzt.
It is absolutely clear why Barrett is taking this position: "By 2010, Intel said, China would be the single largest market for its PC and communications chips." If Asia goes off, builds their own OS to their own standards, Intel and Microsoft will be threatened.
Build away Asia! This will force change and flexibility on the industry. Stagnation only benefits those that are intrenched.
He mentions nothing of Linux and as a matter of fact said that stimulation of local software development would be the right direction (translation go with your linux plans but leave the hardware to us). Now of course he is going to say this. I think in the short term they need to be trying to keep a finger on AMD which is about to make their lives miserable with the release of their 64 bit chip.
Got Code?
..including standards using Linux-based software, WE may be doomed to failure, since 'such a strategy might protect local companies and markets in the LONG term, it would make it more difficult for AMERICAN companies to participate in ASIAN markets.
Basically China is well on the way to becoming a larger economy than either the US or EU. Other regional powers like India and Indonesia have a strong incentive to go along with a China/Japan/South Korea backed standard---quite simply it will be cheaper. There are also quite a few places in the world that would rather no rely on US based technology(i.e. The Islamic world and some of Latin America/Africa fit that category)
Now, I suspect that at first, this new Asian/Linux standard won't be markedly higher performance or more visually attractive than the Wintel standard. However, if this Asian consortium honors its copyleft obligations, we'll see a large block of mission critical applications running under Linux that can be evaluated by a recompile on radically different hardware. (i.e. we will see stuff like decent, enterprise level database applications on this Linux platform-and the Chinese government may find it in their interests to just fund the existing open source projects rather than going to folks like Oracle).
There is already magic sitting around that has the potential to eat Intel's lunch. In particular, I like the stuff that Chuck more has done with Colorforth and his Forth processors. Those designs are at present taylored for very low power applications-but given proper incentives, someone might figure out how to do something with a lot more power than current desktop designs. This Asian initiative means that the the software for real, mission-critical applications could be available for an appropriate recompile.
China is just the ultimate "big customer". They are big enought that they don't have to cater to Intel or Microsoft. By choosing Linux, China is empowering a software constituency that is capable of beating Wintel technologically. The likely end result is that Wintel will find themselves as the technological backwater. I suspect Microsoft is in a better position to adapt to these changes, but Intel has a serious problem ahead.
From the FT artice:
Mr Barrett's comments come two weeks after officials from China, Japan and South Korea agreed to co-operate on the development of software applications based on the free Linux computer operating system
Barrett's point wasn't about Linux. The FT just threw that angle in to get the suckers riled up, and it worked.
The FT could have said that Barrett warned against "proprietary" standards based on binary arithmatic. Note it's not the technical details of the implementation he's concerned about, its their proprietary nature.
Andy Grove delivered a very simmilar speech to European bigwigs about a decade ago and he was right.
Oh Gee...
You better not let prevent us from taking over your markets of 3 Billion people, or we won't allow you access to our 400 Million....
Errr...yeah riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigggghhht.
Fact is, like it or not, China could build its own products, and all of its own technology, and completely shut the West out and make one hell of a killing.
They do not need us.
If you ask any Chinese technology business over there, they do not like the fact American companies think they can't do anything worth while in computing, space, science...etc unless western companies invade their markets.
I think during the next 10 years we are going to have one hell of a surprise in store for ourselves as China tells us where to stick our computers and our software.
-gc
Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
such a strategy might protect local companies and markets in the short term, [but] it would make it more difficult for Asian companies to participate in world markets.
Given the size of China, Japan and Korean markets combined, I'd say that statement could be turned on its head.
The World markets might find solutions based on the Asian standards to be perfectly adaptable to simpler Western alphabets and to be less expensive, too.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
reasonable point of view about this issue. I believe that Barret is honestly and forthrightly expressing good advice, unburdened with personal aspirations or concerns. I believe that aliens have been stealing spaceships full of Gouda cheese as weapons against the Ant People of Sector Omega. I hope that people can give Mr. Barret the benefit of the doubt that he is trying to use his experience to help the governments of Asia on this important issue.
So firstly, Prescott is 64-bit and Intel needs a 64-bit version of Windows to run on it 'cause hell will freeze over before they use AMD's 64-bit instruction set.
... Intel needs Microsoft big-time or their Prescott will fail. Hmmmmmm.
And then Intel start lecturing Asian countries about being obediant little consumers, and buying Windows, and not cutting off their nose to spite their face by investing in Linux.
What was the first bit again? Oh that's right
'such a strategy might protect local companies and markets in the short term, [but] it would make it more difficult for Asian companies to participate in world markets.'
OK, China has over a billion people. Add in other parts of Asia that would like to participate and you've got a market that is something like 4 to 5 times as big as the US market. And then consider
that most of the European governments will probably be adopting Linux over the next five years... And then we'll see Barrett's quote being made by someone else in either Europe or Asia that goes something like:
'The strategey of sticking with Windows might protect local companies in the US (like Micro$oft) in the short term, but it would make it more difficult for American companies to participate in world markets.'
Actually, Barrett doesn't care much at all about Windows (he only cares as much as it promotes Intel CPUs) - he's most worried about China's own CPU (Red Dragon, or whatever it's called) improving to the point where it can be produced competitively with Intel's own CPUs. When that happens, Intel probably won't be selling too many units in China.
In the plans of China, Japan and Korea to develop their own system based on Linux, did they at any time mention establishing proprietart, local interoperability standards? As far as I can tell, they would develop their own OS and support software and adhere to global standards such as TCP/IP and other open standards (such as XML, etc.)
Does Intel know something about these local developments that we're not aware of?
Another good question is who decides on what becomes a global standard. It most certainly isn't Intel. This just boosts the need to have an international organization that is open to ALL countries without prejudice. So that countries like the aforementioned can participate in open standards development, yet not remain reliant on foreign software developers.
I'm all for free trade myself, but sometimes a government, for the good of its people, not just the businessmen, has to take a hand to prevent a disaster -- in this case, a US monopoly dictating computing standards to the entire nation of China.
The government is doing what governments are supposed to do. Serve the interest of all, not just the interested few. By doing this, they will obviously boost their own IT sector, and free it from ruthless exploitation by a runaway US monopoly.
Remember, Microsoft no longer operates in a free market. It is a monopoly, which means it owns and controls the market, no matter how you wiggle around the term "owns".
China, it can be argued, is just leveling the field. Too bad for Bill.
The US has always used government fiat to boost its own businesses. We ignored copyright laws of other countries until the 20th century. The guv built a highway system to crush the railroad companies, build the auto giants, and create massive susburban growth to the detriment of the cities and public education therein.
It chooses winners and losers by awarding defense contracts. It controls interstate commerce. Regulates imports to benefit American interests. It now chooses who can and cannot run foreign countries. In Iraq, the administration has now served notice that the nation MUST permit foreign interests to control their public and private companies.
In comparison, China telling MS to take a hike ain't so bad.
"There has also been discussion, especially in China, of developing standardised microprocessors and other types of chips."
There is Intel's only real concern. I hardly think that Intel gives a rip about which OS China chooses to run as long as China uses CPUs made by Intel.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Whole Asia, including China and India, is already more than half of the world. That's surely enough for them.
And that's surely more than half of the world of computer makers and plants...
Christophe (Don't hesitate to point out my spelling and grammar mistakes, I want to learn - Thanks).
Just curious, what would be the name of that cheaper non-x86 CPU? As for now I see all non-x86 personal computers and workstations are more expensive than same performance x86 ones. Or did I miss some one?
Less is more !
Many solutions compete over how perfectly they blend into foreign environments, save and load most common commercial file formats.
The masses that use Linux aren't locked out of MS file formats anymore since years, and Microsoft file format users aren't tied to their lock-in files as much anymore either.
The open sourced alternative ways of loading and saving foreign format files bypass problems of the past with elegancy that is unmatched in the commercial world (where is dead project won't rise from the ashes without money involved).
The "scratch your own itch" way works out neatly. Whoever feels the desire to do so canl pick whatever _they_ think is best for them. Craig's warning is unnecessary and feels a little out of place.
Leopard cub
"Although such a strategy might protect local companies and markets in the short term, it would make it more difficult for Asian companies to participate in world markets, he said"
.doc file 'cos I only have MS Office" by 2010.
We're helping to bring in Palladium and we won't tell you how it works unless you play the game our way.
That means if you want to compete with the rest of the world you have to do your local standard here, and then work on an all-new set of development" to meet standards used in other markets
How dare you set up local standards that aren't OUR local standards particularly if your local standards happen to be open and available to all because they're based on Open Source.
You have to ask yourself this: is there an advantage to having a proprietary standard in your country
Unlike our free, open and totally honest and democratic standard as presented by Microsoft
rival standards co-exist, although he predicted that a single technology would eventually win out
If Microsoft can have a monopoly I see no reason why we at Intel can't have one of our own.
Mr Barrett's comments come after a visit to several Asian countries and the opening of an Intel research and development centre in Taiwan. By 2010, Intel said, China would be the single largest market for its PC and communications chips.
There's a billion of you and 250,000 of us and unless we can screw your embryonic chip and Linux based software market we expect to be saying "but I can't send you a
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
" One OS ought to be enough for anybody "
- Craig Barrett, Intel, 2003
Despite a long-standing and profitable relationship which constrains public friction, Intel and Microsoft have often had battles of varing seriousness on a bunch of topics...
.Net)
Intel has been / is mad at Microsoft about:
- Constant attempts over the years to generalize their OSes to other processor archectures (NT on Alpha/MIPs, Pocket PC on all sorts of non-Intel (non X-scale) cpus and, of course, x86-64 and the eventual cpu independent version of
- Blocking Intel on hardware standards and initiatives
- Microsoft dragging it's feet about supporting new hardware features in the OS (eg USB on NT (never really), Hyperthreading (2 years) and Itanium Architecture (Linux had IA64 up and running 3 years before Ms)
-Microsoft's attempt to position Intel cpus as just another processor they support.
Microsoft has been / is mad at Intel about:
- Intel's general support of Linux in general including founding and funding the Open Source Development Lab (where Linus and Andrew are employed now)
- Intel's support of HP in running HP-UX on Itanium and Intel's historic support for Novell Netware, Solaris, Unixware and other Unices
-Support for OS-independent management and other hardware APIs that let other OSes get parity or better with Windows
-Occasionally making end-users aware of the prickly truth that the cost advantage of "Wintel" vs big RISC UNIX is all Intel hardware economics which makes the solution cheaper in spite of the greater cost of the Ms software
-Intel's attempt to position Windows as just another OS they support.
That would be a good example of irony. Another good example is Microshaft and Intel farming out their programming overseas, then whining like a bitch when a those very same nations collaborate to cut them out of the equation. Or is that hypocrisy? I get confused myself sometimes. :)
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Strange.
Intel has been one of Linux's greatest supporters. It has helped Intel break into the risc dominated unix field with cheap lintel servers.
The problem is that the original article had a significant slant, and the Slashdot post warped this entirely out of context. Look at the original quote. Barrett is simply warning China that trying to *deliberately* produce incompatible systems to protect local tech companies is a bad idea. (If the only computer you can use in China is Chinese-made, it helps out local tech.) AFAIK, Intel isn't even at risk -- China's best efforts aren't anywhere near competitive to Intel. The statement is a pretty good, clear, reasonable technical argument.
If Barrett ever mentioned Linux, it wasn't part of the quote. The suggestion that he was pushing against Linux was introduced by the article author. We have no idea whether he was talking about hardware, application software, or what. Heck, even if he *was* talking about Linux, I'll happily buy into his quote. While using Linux may be a very good idea, using it because you're trying to deliberately introduce incompatibility to protect local industry is quite stupid in the long run.
May we never see th