How The Game Is Played

http://blogs.sun.com/gameguy/date/20050513 Friday May 13, 2005

My Biggest Fear

I promised in yesterday's Blog that I would share with you my biggest fear in the consumer space. Here it is.

There is a juggernaut barreling down its tracks aimed right at consumer computing. And it scares me that no one seems to have noticed. Certainly I haven't heard anyone else talking about it . That Juggernaut is owned by IBM and its called PowerPC.

For a long time now IBM has been entrenching PowerPC in the embedded space. A great many set top boxes run on PPC. We even use a PPC as the administration processor on one of our own AMD based server boxes. All for the same reason-- they are cheap. And the more they get used, the higher the volumes IBM can make them in, and the cheaper they become.

What really caught my attention though was this. Every next generation video game console is PPC based. Gamecube was already PPC and the assumption is Nintendo's next box, Revolution, will be too. Sony's much vaunted “cell processor” in their PS3 is, by all reports, just a multi-core PPC with a couple of extra vector processors thrown onto the die. And scariest of all, XBox2 is Power PC based.

Why is this scary? Because Microsoft has tipped their hand and announced that they intend a version of XBox2 that also has all of their MediaPC functionality. Written right there between the lines is this-- Microsoft is porting XP to the PPC. They have to in order to meet that goal. By the time they are done enabling all their Media software they will have virtually all of XP on that platform.

So lets play what-if for a minute, What if Microsoft has decided that they don't like being tied at the hip to Intel and intends to offer PowerPC XP based computers? “That'll never work”, is the answer I usually hear when I suggest this, “what about the legacy apps?”

Well, I thought Microsoft might have the guts to brave this anyway... and then I realized just recently they won't have to. They already own a technical solution to that problem. About a year ago they bought, lock stock and barrel, a company that makes a product that allows Intel software to run on PowerPC. A darling of the Apple community, the product is called “VirtualPC” (http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/virtualpc/virtualpc.aspx?pid=virtualpc).

This seemed an odd purchase at the time and many guesses at Microsoft's motives floated, including that they did it just to screw Apple. That makes little sense however. Despite what Apple loyalists tell themselves, today Apple is no threat to Microsoft nor is it likely to ever be one.

But factor in the port of XP to PowerPC and all of a sudden it stops looking like a weird whim and instead begins to look like a disturbing level of coherent strategy. With the release of the Media-enabled XBox2, Microsoft will own everything they need to dump Intel in favor of IBM.

At which point, IBM will own everything but PDAs and cell phones. But with all that other strength, plus their embedded experience and success, at that point thats a simple win. They are already half-way there with their embedded PPCs. And IBM certainly has the brain power to turn those into low-power PDA and cell phone chips.

And that would leave IBM and Microsoft holding all the cards in the consumer space. As the final, scariest thought. ask yourself this:

In a world of a single instruction set, the PPC instruction set, who needs a VM?

Comments:

NT4 shipped for ppc (as well as alpha and mips), so I doubt it's even that big a deal to get it running on that platform again.

Posted by Steve on May 13, 2005 at 07:33 AM EDT #

While I personally think it is unlikely that MS will port Windows to the PowerPC as a general purpose OS, the .NET runtime should (in theory) allow applications to run on all Windows platforms without recompiling...

Posted by Bob on May 13, 2005 at 08:40 PM EDT #

If Microsoft continues to ship demonstrably inferior products, it's hard to see how the tag-team of Apple, Linux, and IBM doesn't pose a threat to them.

Posted by john on May 14, 2005 at 12:29 PM EDT #

As long as Apple continues being 5% or elss of the marekt, which is what they've always been and continue to be, they cannot be considered a credible threat to the owner of the other 95%.

As for quality, that has never been a determiner of success in the market. if you have any doubt on that, I suggest you get yourself a McDonalds hamburger and eat it while watching the movie "Tucker".

Posted by Jeff K on May 14, 2005 at 02:36 PM EDT #

WinCE, or whatever they call it now, is, as far as I know, pretty portable. If think some PocketPC products are based on the ARM RISC architecture, or a descendant. I think there are (or have been) other CPU architectures in use as well in PocketPC products. The XBox probably won't run WinCE, but it suggests they have a significant base of portable code. The lack of the rest of XP's features in current WinCE may just be a reflection of the limited resources of the hardware WinCE is targeted at. I'm not sure why Microsoft would want to go PowerPC in general. It's not like the cost of the CPU is a big factor in PC pricing. In budget PCs, the most expensive component is often the Windows operating system.

Posted by Jon H on May 14, 2005 at 07:02 PM EDT #

Also, if a VM isn't needed any more, then that's just a good reason for Sun to finally provide an optimized Java-to-PPC compiler, and move away from the VM model for desktop apps.
The VM would still be valuable for server-based software, where there's a bit more diversity in CPUs, and it's useful to be able to deploy software on different hardware as needed.

Posted by Jon H on May 14, 2005 at 07:06 PM EDT #

I think this raises a big question about Intel. Clearly it seems more and more that IBM is trusted into giving us a roadmap into the future. If they can deliver it, and it's demonstrated in practice with Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, Apple... well, Intel is in for some trouble. They're already late on the ball regarding 64-bit computing. Maybe all those people who were criticizing Motorola and praising Intel's efforts overlooked IBM and its ability. It's POWER architecture and this Cell is looking grander and grander for the PPC technology..

Posted by Proud on May 18, 2005 at 04:02 PM EDT #

Microsoft could be compelled to port Windows server products over to PPC again. When one considers just how far ahead Power5 is over x86 it puts them in weak position both from a roi and performance standpoint. Consider that the Power5 is roughly 8 times the speed Itanium II with a fully EPIC optimized app. Now consider that IBM's 1U Power 5 sell for $3,500. There is a lot of companies implementing the Power5 1u. So on the Windows server platforms I think it is a very real possiblity. Especially if IBM or some other company started pushing. But remember IBM see's Power as means to cut into Windows. As for the desktop and especially laptops there is some significant advantages. This is especially true wtih regards to the power savings advantages. So it's possible that IBM chip division would use the server as a means to drive adoption of ppc on non-Apple platforms. On the otherhand I believe IBM has a unwritten non-compete agreement with apple for ppc consumer pc's. It's much harder to get PC companies to manufacture PPC products due to the large volumes required. But it's not impossible if the market demand is there.

Posted by Randall Shimizu on May 23, 2005 at 05:57 AM EDT #

You didn't explain why this is your biggest fear. IBM's opening of the PC standard is what we have to thank for the success of the PC to date. IBM has created power.org to do a similar thing for the Power architecture. From where I sit, it looks like IBM has demonstrated quite a bit of honorable-ness in all of this. Why would an IBM-PPC-dominated Personal Computer space be any more scary than an Intel-dominated one? Especially with IBM's Linux moves?

Posted by Corndog on May 24, 2005 at 08:54 PM EDT #

Post a Comment:
  • HTML Syntax: NOT allowed