Slashdot Mirror
Dell Protests 'Not Wintel's Lapdog'
An anonymous reader writes "C|Net is reporting on a protestation by Dell's CTO, Kevin Kettler, who says quite loudly that they are not Microsoft and Intel's puppet." From the article: "Essentially, Kettler argued, Dell was responsible for selecting, if not necessarily developing, many of the technologies in today's desktop computers and servers. Among standards for which he said Dell deserves credit are 802.11 wireless networking, PCI Express communications technology and 64-bit extensions to Intel's x86 line of processors."
Isn't this like Pinocchio claiming that he isn't Geppetto's puppet?
Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
He's taking credit for 64 bit extensions. Uh didnt AMD do that, NOT Intel, and therefore NOT Dell?
Um, Dell, you don't use AMD chips in any of your products. (I'm not counting Alienware here, since they were purchased long after AMD64 and EM64T came out.) AMD was the first company to release 64-bit extensions to IA32.
Dell also had nothing to do with IA64, considering Intel's primary partner for that was Dell's competitor HP.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
What about apple and Airport, built into the ibook, released in 1999. I do not believe ANYONE had a builtin 802.11b solution back then, except for apple. (there was 802.11b, just as a pc card).
In fact, the ibooks were delayed because they had yet to pass FCC testing when they were announced at MacWorld.
Apple Exec Claims "We're Not IBM's Lapdog" And they've proven that. If Dell's CTO wants some crediblity on his statement, maybe he should try to make public moves that show it.
Of course you're not a wittle doggie woggie, are you Kettler whettler? Now who wants a treat? Who wants a treat? Good boy!
-Grey
Silver Clipboard: Time Management Tips
Delusions of Relevance.
"64-bit extensions to Intel's x86 line of processors", and here all this time I thought Intel ripped AMD's 64-bit spec for x86.
Dell doesn't really need to be defensive. They do one thing, and they do it really well: Dell builds cheap computers. There's a lot of value there, the quality of their product and support notwithstanding.
Sure, they don't really do R&D. But they don't need to - they have Intel, Microsoft, Lexmark, and the rest of the OEM partners to do that. They are a gateway to the market, not a market-maker. That's their niche. It's a really big one, and they do it really well. After all, they do make billions a year. And unlike Microsoft, they do it without being a monopoly.
The ironic part is that Dell has always been very up-front about the fact that they do no research, pioneer no technologies, and create nothing new. Dell is all about execution, not creation: they manufacture devices based upon the technologies of others, deliver them to consumers, and do it with very low overhead.
Which is a perfectly fine thing for them to do. It's not heroic work, but neither is being a plumber, and we still like to have them around.
But I have to admit that my respect for any plumber would go down if he started trying to convince me that he's the one that actually discovered the Bernoulli Principle.
Dell is Intel's best customer. Intel bends over backwards seven different ways to keep them happy. Intel will give Dell what they want, or Dell will build AMD systems. There's been several times when rumors of Dell selling AMD based systems. Shortly after that, Dell quashes the rumor and announces a major new partnership with Intel.
Isn't this like Pinocchio claiming that he isn't Geppetto's puppet?
I want a new computer.
On www.dell.ca, I selected a Dimension 3100 - it's all that I need in a general purpose PC. I clicked on the "Customize it!" button. And it seems that I can't get it without Windows. (Not sure if that link will work, it set a few cookies in Firefox.) Furthermore, I have serious issues with any technology company sufficiently ignorant to run IIS.
Though I've always liked Dell hardware, Pinocchio gets no sale from me.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
Among standards for which he said Dell deserves credit are 802.11 wireless networking, PCI Express communications technology and 64-bit extensions to Intel's x86 line of processors.
The article went on to say Dell deserves credit for developing the Internet, two-button mouse, and sliced bread.
-William Brendel
I've never seen an option to get Windows in 64bits on the Dell site.
You didn't look very hard. My Precision 470 came with XP64:
Important: Not all current applications and/or peripherals are compatible with 64-bit and may not function properly. Be sure to verify compatibility with all application and peripheral vendors prior to purchasing a Dell Precision platform with a 64-bit operating system.
Genuine Windows® XP Professional SP2 with media
Genuine Windows® XP Professional SP2 without media
Genuine Windows® XP Professional x64 w/ media
Genuine Windows® XP Professional x64 w/o media
Red Hat Linux v4.0 No Media
Red Hat Linux v4.0 with Media
Red Hat Linux v4.0 64bit No Media
Red Hat Linux v4.0 64bit with Media
Their innovation is inserting cards into sockets, connecting cables, using screwdriver and putting label onto their "product".
The blurb at the top of the page isn't in context. Dell is saying they pushed Intel to use 802.11b instead of HomeRF, that they asked for 64 bit extensions in their processors and pushed for PCI Express.
"We don't agree on that one, Dick - I'm sure no one here in the stadium does, so let's go up to the booth for a quick moment and see what Zandy, our replay commentator, has to say."
"Well, Bob, we're seeing the same footage as the refs down on the field, and they seem to be simply making sure they all have the same opinion. Caution is good. Our view was blocked from up here, but on the tape, you can clearly see that Dell never had control of the ball, and there doesn't seem to be anyt...wait... - there's the ruling! No innovation by Dell! The refs are in complete agreement too - back to you Bob!"
HomeRF (Intel) vs 802.11 (Dell)
DDR (Dell) vs RAMBUS (Intel)
Itanium (Intel) vs x64 (Dell)
Sounds to me like Dell always follows Intel, unless Intel's choice is too risky. The last item is an excelent example. Itanium is risky so Dell wanted nothing of that. On the other hand, using non-Intel processors is risky so Dell just waited until Intel brought out 64bit x86 processors.
Dell isn't Intel's puppet. Dell is simply run by cowards and, most of the time, Wintel is the safest choice. Dell will follow wherever Intel leads, unless it's out on a limb.
Dell is the worlds biggest mom and pop computer store.
They take off the shelf parts and put them into a case. Nothing wrong with that but they really don't make computers they assemble them.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
No their argument is that by choosing which technologies to include support for, even when the market was not already demanding them, they have made them successful. Apple, for example, may do some R&D and provide technologies standard on its laptops, but since they're usually proprietary, and so little of the market is Apple, they often are of limited success. PC makers often duplicate the useful ones in an open way. Dell would argue it chooses which of the knockoffs to succeed.
It's a lame argument, but to a suit, it makes sense. Choosing which finish product to propogate is not quite as helpful as funding and partipating in the development, but to a suit those are just "expenses".
RTFA folks, the Dell guy in the article is not claiming that Dell inventied WiFi, x86-64 or anything like that. They're claiming that by virtue of their throwing their weight behind a technology, they can be the catalyst to make standards actually be useful. In many ways I tend to agree. It's pretty clear to me that Dell has huge sway over Intel these days. Against MSFT? I'm not too sure.
...but he's talking about those technologies from a business perspective.
Let's have a look at PCI Express. Early in 2004 it had competition from PCI-X - PCI extended - however, Dell here are discussing the implications of swapping from PCI to PCIe. Now, at the time, PCI-X was seen as an interim measure, but Dell skipped it, instead opting to use PCIe across their desktop range. See, they didn't 'invent' it, but a big company like Dell deciding to run with a specific technology is going to have an impact. No doubt we'll probably see the same with ExpressCard, which seems to be standard on pretty much all Dell laptops released since Fall last year - point me in the direction of another manufacturer who's committed to ExpressCard and not still releasing PC card stuff - HP? Lenovo? Fujitsu? Toshiba?
Right, 64-bit extensions. Again, they didn't invent it, but I know that they had an instrumental role in convincing Intel (who needs 64-bit computing?) to add EMT 64 extensions to the Xeon range. That might have been partly forced by Dell's customers asking for 64-bit availability, but you cannot deny that with a big player like Dell dumping out 64-bit Xeons, it did give the market a huge kick up the arse - and one that I'm pretty convinced Intel wouldn't have done on their own. Remember, they stubbornly sat on their hands for ages insisting point blank that 64-bit was not the way to go and that if you wanted it, you had to buy Itaniums (*shudder*).
Wireless? The only evidence I can find that supports this is that Dell were the first company to offer an 802.11b wireless card in a desktop config. I don't for once think that drove any kind of market force as it was an option on the Dimension desktop line, but his points in the article that they stopped Intel marketing that awful HomeRF standard might be justified.
So it's not really 100% bullshit - the guy has some valid points. Yes Dell has helped promote a couple of standards over the years - USB 2 first appeared on Dells, Centrino laptops first appeared as Dells, they were second (behind Apple) to ship LCDs as standard with PCs. However, they've also bombed in other areas: they still don't have a coherent Mediacenter PC and seem to offer the OS on anything you'd want, and they don't have a tablet option. Now if they could pull their finger out and try to push those down people's throats, we might be getting somewhere.
So, before you're moronic enough to read bullshit into what he said, sit back and have a think about how a company's size can dictate whether technologies succeed or not, then think about what didn't succeed but could've, like Itanium, HomeRF and PCI-X...
If Dell says Intel in 2003 that they buy only x86-64 supported chips in 2006, while certain portion earlier. Now Intel has two choices, give dell chip they want or let AMD give dell chip they wan't.
Also for popularizing pci-express, if DELL says they are phasing out AGP in favour of pci-express in certain time scale, the gfx-card manufacturers are going to listen very carefully, as the chipset vendors too, since they know that if they don't have product that dell wants to buy the other guys will. And by dell making such decision practicly guarantees a reasonable market to go full production of the new interface.
As far as Blue Ray Disc Vs HD-DVD, if Dell chooces BD, then they will wait until they can get BD in pricepoints that fit the Dell model, and skip the HD-DVD unless the situation becomes such that it's no-brainer to include instead of DVD, and BD would still be too expensive.
But with Dell committed on one side, that side has big edge on PC:s once the prices come down, if there is competition between formats going on anymore, but don't assume dell stays that way if HD-DVD drive costs 20$ while BD costs 300$ . Dell is still volume manufacturer, but BD will be what they prefer if price difference is reasonable, and that whats will be in many peoples machines when the drive isn't too expensive for dell to put as default option in many of their lines.
Emacs is good operating system, but it has one flaw: Its text editor could be better.
He doesn't claim to have invented or developed them, he claims to have *pressured Intel into adopting them*
Indeed, and just because the dog drags the owner about by the leash a bit doesn't mean he's not still the dog.
One good tug on the choke chain'll bring 'im up short.
KFG
And if you want service even worse than what you get from Dell, by all means, buy that Alienware. Hmm, and if you want service even worse than that, put XP on that MacBook and see what you get back...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
okay point taken but since i would say that since the small business systems are top secret burn before reading for most of the mall dwelling "dell dudes" Dell sells linux systems would not be true until HOME SYSTEMS come with linux installed
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
It's good for Dell to push Microsoft and Intel around a little. Microsoft needs to have the #1 PC manufacturer tell them, "Uh, we're not under your thumb." Remember the 90s, when Microsoft controlled OEMs with an iron-fist, illegally coercing them into shipping only Windows through license revocation threats?
"Sufferin' succotash."
It might be just me, but it really seems like /. is becoming less a site for tech news for geeks, and more a site for geek politics. It seems like every day there are fewer and fewer stories about any actual tech, and they are all being replaced with stories about the politics of "geek" culture. I'm not really saying it is a bad thing, but just in my opinion a little boring.
I like how Dell's resistance to change isn't noted. They didn't exactly embrace USB or IEEE-1394 (FireWire). They took their time offering DVI connectors on desktops. They weren't even at the forefront of SATA either. So we should give them credit for these three "contributions"?
Apple was one of the more active members of the WI-FI consortium. I'm almost positive that they equipped all of their machines with Airport slots and integrated antennas... long before Dell even offered it as an option (by many months). I think even e-Machines beat Dell to the WI-FI race.
The industry had already agreed on 802.11 long before Intel decided to follow suit (Intel's horrid Home-RF). I'm highly skeptical of Dell claiming that their clout had anything to do with brining Intel to their senses. Not even Intel can take on the whole industry... just look at Itanium.
So they may have helped convince Intel to bring 64-bit to the Pentium like the AMD Opteron, PowerPC, MIPS, SPARC, PA-RISC, Itanium, and Alpha. Who cares? It was a natural evolution that software (on PCs) still can barely take advantage of, barring massive recompilation. Everybody knows that AMD, is the indisputable innovator and influence for x86-64... beating Intel out the door by a large margin.
Dell backed 64-bit extensions to x86, primarily based on price. Itanium was simply out of the price point for their customers. No one should receive credit or be rewarded for running away from Itanium. Especially when your biggest reason is price. There's 1,000,001 reasons not to use Itanium. I'd be more impressed if they actually named one.
Lastly, the article makes it sound as if Dell invented PCI Express in-house. Dell doesn't design chipsets. They only buy them in bulk quantity. It's as if I'd take credit for the rise of Jolt Cola, because I buy it in bulk at Costco. No no no. They tell their fab to solder whatever connectors the chipsets support. It's not like they led the drive for faster interconnects. Again, AMD led the pack with Hypertransport, borrowed from the Alpha team... pushing Intel to raise their FSB speed, to even be able to support PCI-X & PCI-E.
Everything is all lies.
Marx was a genius, wrong in many places but with a searing insight into the limitations of capitalism.
The Mike Adams whom you quote as saying "Marxism is an emotional disorder, not a political philosophy" is a blogging me-too. He seems reasonably intelligent but his incoherent partisan bias prevents him from seeing that Russian Communism is less communism than American Capitalism is capitalism. He's certainly in no position to critique Marxism as an emotional disorder given the quasi-neocon tone of the articles he writes for FrontPage.
"Free-market" capitalism is a fiction, one that is functionalized by government protectionism and pragmatic socialism. Yes, it's a heck of a lot better than Russian communism, which was nothing but bureaucratic totalitarianism jump-started by genocide. However, to not realize that American-style capitalism could be improved by more judicious application of socialist principles (read Marxism) is short-sighted at best.
It's sort of like the mouth saying "I'm the one chewing all this food so I'm going to keep it all to myself" without understanding the role the rest of the body parts play in the process, including "useless" parts such as the earlobes, armpit hair, and the appendix.
I'm not sure why or how the heck Dell offers no price difference between preinstalled/supported Windows/Linux and uninstalled/unsupported FreeDOS. It's not just a Microsoft thing, though.
TO START
PRESS ANY KEY
Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...
Man did not evolve wearing pants. The foreskin ceased to offer protection and became a liability after humankind decided to clothe itself
I think it was the invention of the zipper that made the foreskin a real liability.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Internet != ARPAnet
And did you read the GP? Al Gore never claimed to have invented the internet. That's just a strawman attack that Gore critics like to bring up continuously. Al Gore stated that he took the initiative in creating the internet, as he was the first politician to recognize the importance of the internet and did in fact promote and support its development from his seat in Congress in the early days of the net. Even Vinton Cerf and Robert Kahn have recognized his initiative as having been vital to the success of the internet as it exists today.
From Vinton Cerf and Robert Kahn's joint statement:
So get a clue before you start discrediting other people and perpetuating gross exagerations of their statements.
No need to get snippy. I would personally just rather read a story about some company actually making new standards that will make next years computers even better than they are now, rather than some tired article about what OEM is claiming to have driven what standard in the past.
It isn't that I so much object to the *actual* political stories that effect technology, but rather these "geek club politics" kind of stories. They always seem to boil down to some variant of:
Dell is stupid.
Microsoft is evil.
As is Sony.
But Google isn't.
Open source will save the world.
DRM will destroy the world.
Standards are the world.
Apple invented the world.
This season's fashion report on what all the best coders are using.
It seems like a lot of these stories aren't really even news stories at all, but just another excuse to forward one of the above arguments. There is plenty going on in the world that could excite some really interesting discussion that geeks might be interested in aside from these rather well beaten paths. I don't really think there is much of value left to say on any of these subjects, since they all get weekly coverage, if not daily coverage. You might think it is interesting to have the same conversation about different aspects of the same subjects over and over and over again, but I find it pretty boring.