Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

IBM Left in the Dark

Filed under

There's no shortage of rumors as to just what really went on between Apple and IBM with regards to the souring of their relationship, and rehearsing them all here would be an exercise in futility. However, John Markoff of the New York Times has offered his take, based in-part on "close sources," and I thought it worth mentioning here.

Apple purportedly pulled a bit of a fast one on IBM, with Jobs only informing IBM of the decision late in the day Friday, right before Monday's big announcement. IBM apparently learned of the possibility of the deal the way most of us did, through the early reports of the WSJ. The question is, why? Jobs' WWDC presentation heavily implied that IBM simply couldn't deliver. The infamous image of the missing 3GHz PowerMac behind Jobs on stage certainly made it seem like Big Blue couldn't get the job done, and Jobs came off looking like he had to make a tough, but thoroughly necessary decision. IBM, not surprisingly, tells it a different way.

"Technical issues were secondary to the business issues," said an executive close to the I.B.M. side of the negotiations. Because the business was not profitable, I.B.M. "decided not to continue to go ahead with the product road map."

In other words, Apple wasn't interested in paying IBM's prices, and the prices that they would pay weren't enough for IBM to consider taking the road map further. Given Apple's lack of fear with regards to impressive price tags, this leads me to think that IBM was potentially looking to increase the prices of the PowerPC 970 in a significant way to justify spending more time on the project. Then again, no one can deny that the PowerPC 970 had a heat problem. The water-cooled PowerMac, the non-existent G5 laptop, and the 1-year overdue 3GHz part are all signs of problems at IBM. How much more scratch did IBM want to make these problems go away, and was it certain that these problems could be solved by the almighty dollar? Jobs' actions seem to suggest that, if this scenario is correct, he apparently had little faith in IBM. That, or the Blue Man Group seemed like a smarter way to preserve those profit margins.


More in Tux Machines

Linux Mint 18.1 Is The Best Mint Yet

The hardcore Linux geeks won’t read this article. They’ll skip right past it… They don’t like Linux Mint much. There’s a good reason for them not to; it’s not designed for them. Linux Mint is for folks who want a stable, elegant desktop operating system that they don’t want to have to constantly tinker with. Anyone who is into Linux will find Mint rather boring because it can get as close to the bleeding edge of computer technology. That said, most of those same hardcore geeks will privately tell you that they’ve put Linux Mint on their Mom’s computer and she just loves it. Linux Mint is great for Mom. It’s stable, offers everything she needs and its familiar UI is easy for Windows refugees to figure out. If you think of Arch Linux as a finicky, high-performance sports car then Linux Mint is a reliable station wagon. The kind of car your Mom would drive. Well, I have always liked station wagons myself and if you’ve read this far then I guess you do, too. A ride in a nice station wagon, loaded with creature comforts, cold blowing AC, and a good sound system can be very relaxing, indeed. Read more

Make Gnome 3 more accessible for everyday use

Gnome 3 is a desktop environment that was created to fix a problem that did not exist. Much like PulseAudio, Wayland and Systemd, it's there to give developers a job, while offering no clear benefit over the original problem. The Gnome 2 desktop was fast, lithe, simple, and elegant, and its replacement is none of that. Maybe the presentation layer is a little less busy and you can search a bit more quickly, but that's about as far as the list of advantages goes, which is a pretty grim result for five years of coding. Despite my reservation toward Gnome 3, I still find it to be a little bit more suitable for general consumption than in the past. Some of the silly early decisions have been largely reverted, and a wee bit more sane functionality added. Not enough. Which is why I'd like to take a moment or three to discuss some extra tweaks and changes you should add to this desktop environment to make it palatable. Read more

When to Use Which Debian Linux Repository

Nothing distinguishes the Debian Linux distribution so much as its system of package repositories. Originally organized into Stable, Testing, and Unstable, additional repositories have been added over the years, until today it takes more than a knowledge of a repository's name to understand how to use it efficiently and safely. Debian repositories are installed with a section called main that consists only of free software. However, by editing the file /etc/apt/sources.list, you can add contrib, which contains software that depends on proprietary software, and non-free, which contains proprietary software. Unless you choose to use only free software, contrib and non-free are especially useful for video and wireless drivers. You should also know that the three main repositories are named for characters from the Toy Story movies. Unstable is always called Sid, while the names of Testing and Stable change. When a new version of Debian is released, Testing becomes Stable, and the new version of Testing receives a name. These names are sometimes necessary for enabling a mirror site, but otherwise, ignoring these names gives you one less thing to remember. Read more

Today in Techrights