[For some reason, my last email appeared to be rejected by the listserv. [third try]]
On 1 Aug 2005 17:14:45 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Are you taking about getting IBM to help fund OGP? > > Yes, that was the thought, as they are pro Open Source, and have made chips > for the last 30 years or so. Investing in Linux (mostly), plus a few other open source technologies is highly profitable to IBM, because it helps them sell hardware. But would they consider it to be profitable to invest in another graphics chip? They already have some of their own. Of course, it might be beneficial for them to influence the design of a new chip that they themselves haven't had to hire people to design. They can get good hardware similarly to how they get good software with Linux. Also, how would the community feel about the degree of corporate control that IBM would inevitably try to wield over it? If I were them, I would want to make sure my investment didn't get away from me. But what they want and what everyone else wants may not be the same. Yes, it could be a great opportunity to them, but would they see it that way? But I suppose as long as they only want ADDITIONAL features, they're paying for it, and it doesn't interfere with what the rest of us want... why not? At full production, Traversal could make millions/year from OGP-related products. Is IBM going to care about a few million/year, when they usually try to invest in things that make billions? Only if it helps them sell more servers. Which it could. > > As I see it, it is very differcult to tell which of these options that will > seam the most tempting to IBM. > > Option 2 would properly be very easy to get from them. That's a charity amount, although even a small amount could be a great PR move for them. PR is a good thing, especially when it comes to OSS. :) > > Option 4 is indeed likely, as they have active chip fabs that produce > PowerPC, Cell and etc. processors, so a few million would likely be much less > if they were to produce them. Again, large volumes to us are small volumes to them. However, I wouldn't be surprised if they gave us a deep discount on production. So say it cost only 1 million to produce the 100k quantity. We still have to get what, to us, is a huge amount of money. Mind you, if they decide to buy a lot of them, all they have to do is make them and pay us a sort of royalty so that eventually, we can afford to produce another lot ourselves. > > And taken in consideration that they truely believes in Open Source, it could > be of interest for they servers. IBM, like any good business, believes in what's good for business. Trust me. They're not into open source on principle. I don't say that to put them down. It's just good business. We give them kudos for picking Linux, but as a company, they didn't choose it for the same reasons we did. What's likely is that IBM had employees who used Linux at home, and those employees made a good business case for using Linux, and IBM LISTENED to them, which is the impressive part. Businesses are often slow to adapt, huge ones especially. IBM wasn't. > Would an option be to ask for them to make the prototypes? It is an option for _us_. :) > What if IBM offered to help on the design instead of giving money? Would that > be of interest? Maybe. What would they help with? _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
