Not sure I agree w/you completey. Yes Apple has always been Motos main computer chip custumer but maybe whe have a "whch came first the chicken or the egg" situation here.
You think that there was no demand for Windows/PPC. I think there was no demand because Moto is and perhapbs will always be TERRIBLE at marketing their often very good products.
Again I point out the fact they they were not even a customer of their own products as indicative of their backwards buisness sense. WHile I know that internal use ofthe PPC by Moto would not equal the amount of chips purchased by Apple by any streatch-still Moto is a HUGE company. That just pains me to think about. Can you imagine Intel using AMD PC's? Or Ford using Volvos internally?
Still regardless of who is right on your point (and to be fair you could be but for me its still tough to call it that way,) in my mind Motos REAL failure was their inability to deliver a competitive product. Intel, AMD, and especially IBM (on the same platform no less) all collectivly kicked Motos ass.
While I'm sure Motorolla DID lose some $$ when Apple pulled the plug on clones but it's definately my opinion that they did not do ANYTHING INTENTIONAL to screw Apple. I think the just made some HUGE business mistakes which were combined with technical INABILITY to provide a competitive product.
Here are a couple of examples of their business cluelessness:
At one time Windows Ran on the PPC-and instead of investing in a hard-core partnership with MS ala Intel they let Windows NT for PPC die on the vine.
Another example-Motorolla DID NOT EAT THEIR OWN DOGFOOD. That's right massive portions of the Moto business domain used INTEL PROCESSORS in their PC's. White Oak Semiconductor a joint chip fab in VA was a client of mine for a brief period (I moved,) The entire Moto team there used HP PC's to get the job done-I am sure if they could have made up JUST A BIT of the loss from the Apple cloe biz if they had used their own products internally. I'm sorry but that's insanity to me.
But the real reason for the demise of their computer chip business was not examples like above (although they helped,) but instead was caused by Motos inability to keep up with the competition. For years apple let Moto be their main chip vendor only to see IBM's PPC products out perform Motos-not at all to mention the fact that the CISC kids at Intel/AMD KICK THEIR ASS in the performance battles.
Please do not think I am falling into the Megahertz myth-the fact remains that Apple real world performance has lagged seriously lagged for some time. This has NEVER been a fault of the PPC architecture as IBM has show again and again.
So yes, lets hope the spin off works well for the Moto chip guys but I would not be hopefull.
The good news for fans of choice and diversity is this.
1. The G5 is AWESOME and will continue to get better.
2. IBM has a clue.
3. Even if the PPC disapered as a platform today Apple has managed to abstracttheir software from any particular chip vendor thanks to using the Mach microkernal (not to mention they have been running skunkworks projects for years to make sure the MacOS could run in x86 varients for years.)
All and all this is nothing but a GOOD thing for everyone involved. Apple gets a better product. IMB gets some real sales from their chip biz. And hopefull the now indie Moto guys gan do a little bit better than when they were shackled to Moto.
Well to be honest they might NOT gain anything. You are quite correct to note that it is not a sure bet by a long stretch.
However I assume that what I outlined in the previous post are the goals. The programmers that SAP has at its disposal have loads of experience with heavy-duty databases, however I can see the management at SAP yearning for the kind of community participation (and thus corporate IT mind share,) that mySQL has. I can see the mySQL team benefiting from the SAP peoples experience.
To answer you question about my ever written a large program the answer is no-unless you count some very large databases being run by several fortune 500 companies, which I imagine you do not.
I am however, a CIO of a pretty decent sized law firm and have had over a dozen years experience in corporate IT.
jd
A SAP mySQL merger/technology sharing agreement (what have you) makes a lot of sense for both groups.
SAP's database is robust, and offers features that mySQL does not. msSQL is popular. msSQL could gain quite a bit of big-time features from SAP's DB (real tansactions, ACID compliance, etc.)SAP gains mind share and a real developers community (which equals growth and continuation of the platform.) IMHO it's a good fit.
jd
Slashdot Mirror
You think that there was no demand for Windows/PPC. I think there was no demand because Moto is and perhapbs will always be TERRIBLE at marketing their often very good products.
Again I point out the fact they they were not even a customer of their own products as indicative of their backwards buisness sense. WHile I know that internal use ofthe PPC by Moto would not equal the amount of chips purchased by Apple by any streatch-still Moto is a HUGE company. That just pains me to think about. Can you imagine Intel using AMD PC's? Or Ford using Volvos internally?
Still regardless of who is right on your point (and to be fair you could be but for me its still tough to call it that way,) in my mind Motos REAL failure was their inability to deliver a competitive product. Intel, AMD, and especially IBM (on the same platform no less) all collectivly kicked Motos ass.
cheers
jd
The did not spin off the chip biz so they would not have to use Moto chips - they already don't.
They spun it off becuase they could not compete and they lost their biggest customer. In short the Moto chip biz was about to D I E.
Here are a couple of examples of their business cluelessness:
At one time Windows Ran on the PPC-and instead of investing in a hard-core partnership with MS ala Intel they let Windows NT for PPC die on the vine.
Another example-Motorolla DID NOT EAT THEIR OWN DOGFOOD. That's right massive portions of the Moto business domain used INTEL PROCESSORS in their PC's. White Oak Semiconductor a joint chip fab in VA was a client of mine for a brief period (I moved,) The entire Moto team there used HP PC's to get the job done-I am sure if they could have made up JUST A BIT of the loss from the Apple cloe biz if they had used their own products internally. I'm sorry but that's insanity to me.
But the real reason for the demise of their computer chip business was not examples like above (although they helped,) but instead was caused by Motos inability to keep up with the competition. For years apple let Moto be their main chip vendor only to see IBM's PPC products out perform Motos-not at all to mention the fact that the CISC kids at Intel/AMD KICK THEIR ASS in the performance battles.
Please do not think I am falling into the Megahertz myth-the fact remains that Apple real world performance has lagged seriously lagged for some time. This has NEVER been a fault of the PPC architecture as IBM has show again and again.
So yes, lets hope the spin off works well for the Moto chip guys but I would not be hopefull.
The good news for fans of choice and diversity is this.
1. The G5 is AWESOME and will continue to get better.
2. IBM has a clue.
3. Even if the PPC disapered as a platform today Apple has managed to abstracttheir software from any particular chip vendor thanks to using the Mach microkernal (not to mention they have been running skunkworks projects for years to make sure the MacOS could run in x86 varients for years.)
All and all this is nothing but a GOOD thing for everyone involved. Apple gets a better product. IMB gets some real sales from their chip biz. And hopefull the now indie Moto guys gan do a little bit better than when they were shackled to Moto.
Is'nt the free market great ;-)
jd
Well to be honest they might NOT gain anything. You are quite correct to note that it is not a sure bet by a long stretch. However I assume that what I outlined in the previous post are the goals. The programmers that SAP has at its disposal have loads of experience with heavy-duty databases, however I can see the management at SAP yearning for the kind of community participation (and thus corporate IT mind share,) that mySQL has. I can see the mySQL team benefiting from the SAP peoples experience. To answer you question about my ever written a large program the answer is no-unless you count some very large databases being run by several fortune 500 companies, which I imagine you do not. I am however, a CIO of a pretty decent sized law firm and have had over a dozen years experience in corporate IT. jd
FileMaker Pro.
A SAP mySQL merger/technology sharing agreement (what have you) makes a lot of sense for both groups. SAP's database is robust, and offers features that mySQL does not. msSQL is popular. msSQL could gain quite a bit of big-time features from SAP's DB (real tansactions, ACID compliance, etc.)SAP gains mind share and a real developers community (which equals growth and continuation of the platform.) IMHO it's a good fit. jd