Intel motherboards going extinct

Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Intel desktop mobos face mass extinction
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26082
10 answers Last reply
More about intel motherboards extinct
  1. Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    Yousuf Khan wrote:

    > Intel desktop mobos face mass extinction
    > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26082
    >

    So what. Today's pricing of computers and components have
    made them throw-away commodities. So long as Intel, or any
    other manufacturer, churns out products that can perform or
    work, there will be buyers. Of course, the fringe players
    will continue to demand top-of-the-line, speedy machines
    and development will continue for them. But what succeeds
    in this niche market should satisfy the thundering herd that
    typically follows.
  2. Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    Yousuf Khan wrote:
    > Intel desktop mobos face mass extinction
    > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26082
    >
    I don't understand why you think this is important. Some product is
    being discontinued, car makers do that all the time. More to the point,
    unless you believe Intel is never going to have any new products, this
    "roadmap" only shows part of the info, so that the article can draw the
    most alarming conclusions.

    I admit that there are a few board there I have used, but other people
    make board, and chipsets, and CPUs. I fail to see anything but normal
    product offering churn.

    --
    bill davidsen
    SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
    http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com
  3. Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:06:11 GMT, Bill Davidsen
    <davidsen@deathstar.prodigy.com> wrote:

    >Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >> Intel desktop mobos face mass extinction
    >> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26082
    >>
    >I don't understand why you think this is important. Some product is
    >being discontinued, car makers do that all the time. More to the point,
    >unless you believe Intel is never going to have any new products, this
    >"roadmap" only shows part of the info, so that the article can draw the
    >most alarming conclusions.
    >
    >I admit that there are a few board there I have used, but other people
    >make board, and chipsets, and CPUs. I fail to see anything but normal
    >product offering churn.

    Obsolescent SKUs are part of any component business of course but the
    article said quite clearly that OEMs, integrators and others were not
    pleased: they cited "scant opportunity to shift stock". Apparently this
    has more to do with a shortage of chipset manufacturing capacity as normal
    product cycles - Intel has chopped off the low, least profitable end of its
    chipset business long before usual expected EOL.

    Do you really think an OEM like Dell or Gateway, or a systems integrator,
    can just shift mbrd components to an alternative supplier with a different
    chipset that quickly and expect to keep business customers happy? Have you
    not heard of platform homogeneity? It's been claimed here umpteen times as
    the reason to stay with Intel as a chipset/mbrd supplier. You should have
    read the article.

    --
    Rgds, George Macdonald
  4. Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    George Macdonald wrote:
    > On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:06:11 GMT, Bill Davidsen
    > <davidsen@deathstar.prodigy.com> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >>
    >>>Intel desktop mobos face mass extinction
    >>>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26082
    >>>
    >>
    >>I don't understand why you think this is important. Some product is
    >>being discontinued, car makers do that all the time. More to the point,
    >>unless you believe Intel is never going to have any new products, this
    >>"roadmap" only shows part of the info, so that the article can draw the
    >>most alarming conclusions.
    >>
    >>I admit that there are a few board there I have used, but other people
    >>make board, and chipsets, and CPUs. I fail to see anything but normal
    >>product offering churn.
    >
    >
    > Obsolescent SKUs are part of any component business of course but the
    > article said quite clearly that OEMs, integrators and others were not
    > pleased: they cited "scant opportunity to shift stock". Apparently this
    > has more to do with a shortage of chipset manufacturing capacity as normal
    > product cycles - Intel has chopped off the low, least profitable end of its
    > chipset business long before usual expected EOL.
    >
    > Do you really think an OEM like Dell or Gateway, or a systems integrator,
    > can just shift mbrd components to an alternative supplier with a different
    > chipset that quickly and expect to keep business customers happy? Have you
    > not heard of platform homogeneity? It's been claimed here umpteen times as
    > the reason to stay with Intel as a chipset/mbrd supplier. You should have
    > read the article.
    >
    Seeing this is from theinquirer could this "shift stock" be UK
    vernacular for "didn't have time to sell our stock and reduce our
    inventory to zero" before the discontinuance was announced and value
    dropped?
    del


    --
    Del Cecchi
    "This post is my own and doesn’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions,
    strategies or opinions.”
  5. Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    George Macdonald wrote:
    > On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:06:11 GMT, Bill Davidsen
    > <davidsen@deathstar.prodigy.com> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >>
    >>>Intel desktop mobos face mass extinction
    >>>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26082
    >>>
    >>
    >>I don't understand why you think this is important. Some product is
    >>being discontinued, car makers do that all the time. More to the point,
    >>unless you believe Intel is never going to have any new products, this
    >>"roadmap" only shows part of the info, so that the article can draw the
    >>most alarming conclusions.
    >>
    >>I admit that there are a few board there I have used, but other people
    >>make board, and chipsets, and CPUs. I fail to see anything but normal
    >>product offering churn.
    >
    >
    > Obsolescent SKUs are part of any component business of course but the
    > article said quite clearly that OEMs, integrators and others were not
    > pleased: they cited "scant opportunity to shift stock". Apparently this
    > has more to do with a shortage of chipset manufacturing capacity as normal
    > product cycles - Intel has chopped off the low, least profitable end of its
    > chipset business long before usual expected EOL.
    >
    > Do you really think an OEM like Dell or Gateway, or a systems integrator,
    > can just shift mbrd components to an alternative supplier with a different
    > chipset that quickly and expect to keep business customers happy? Have you
    > not heard of platform homogeneity? It's been claimed here umpteen times as
    > the reason to stay with Intel as a chipset/mbrd supplier. You should have
    > read the article.
    >
    Having had both Dell and IBM tell me they could no longer supply
    identical servers or previously available options to existing servers, I
    know that vendors can and do obsolete models which were "just announced"
    product less than 15 months ago when I bought the original. IBM has
    withdrawn CPU upgrades for units under two years old, even when the
    parts are still being sold by Intel. These are rack mount servers, not
    consumer goods, and not all units in a given order are always identical,
    vendors make "running production changes" as well, under the same model
    number.

    Those vendors also change RAID controller specs available for new
    purchase (cards), chipsets on the built-in network hardware and/or SCSI
    controllers, etc. And I'm told by my friend who sells Sun that other
    vendors do that as well.

    I believe that vendors are unhappy, but it's because Intel made the
    decision, not because no such decisions have ever been made in the past.
    I did read the article, but didn't see much new. Vendors have been
    changing things on short notice for at minimum 25 years, do you really
    think large business customers are going to be more unhappy that the
    change is driven by Intel instead of the OEM?

    --
    bill davidsen
    SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
    http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com
  6. Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 15:45:56 -0500, Del Cecchi <cecchinospam@us.ibm.com>
    wrote:

    >George Macdonald wrote:
    >> On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:06:11 GMT, Bill Davidsen
    >> <davidsen@deathstar.prodigy.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Intel desktop mobos face mass extinction
    >>>>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26082
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>I don't understand why you think this is important. Some product is
    >>>being discontinued, car makers do that all the time. More to the point,
    >>>unless you believe Intel is never going to have any new products, this
    >>>"roadmap" only shows part of the info, so that the article can draw the
    >>>most alarming conclusions.
    >>>
    >>>I admit that there are a few board there I have used, but other people
    >>>make board, and chipsets, and CPUs. I fail to see anything but normal
    >>>product offering churn.
    >>
    >>
    >> Obsolescent SKUs are part of any component business of course but the
    >> article said quite clearly that OEMs, integrators and others were not
    >> pleased: they cited "scant opportunity to shift stock". Apparently this
    >> has more to do with a shortage of chipset manufacturing capacity as normal
    >> product cycles - Intel has chopped off the low, least profitable end of its
    >> chipset business long before usual expected EOL.
    >>
    >> Do you really think an OEM like Dell or Gateway, or a systems integrator,
    >> can just shift mbrd components to an alternative supplier with a different
    >> chipset that quickly and expect to keep business customers happy? Have you
    >> not heard of platform homogeneity? It's been claimed here umpteen times as
    >> the reason to stay with Intel as a chipset/mbrd supplier. You should have
    >> read the article.
    >>
    >Seeing this is from theinquirer could this "shift stock" be UK
    >vernacular for "didn't have time to sell our stock and reduce our
    >inventory to zero" before the discontinuance was announced and value
    >dropped?

    That's the way I read "shift stock" though whether it means inventory of
    just mbrds or other matching parts that they expected to dribble down to
    zero slowly... I dunno?

    --
    Rgds, George Macdonald
  7. Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 20:40:19 GMT, Bill Davidsen
    <davidsen@deathstar.prodigy.com> wrote:

    >George Macdonald wrote:
    >> On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:06:11 GMT, Bill Davidsen
    >> <davidsen@deathstar.prodigy.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Intel desktop mobos face mass extinction
    >>>>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26082
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>I don't understand why you think this is important. Some product is
    >>>being discontinued, car makers do that all the time. More to the point,
    >>>unless you believe Intel is never going to have any new products, this
    >>>"roadmap" only shows part of the info, so that the article can draw the
    >>>most alarming conclusions.
    >>>
    >>>I admit that there are a few board there I have used, but other people
    >>>make board, and chipsets, and CPUs. I fail to see anything but normal
    >>>product offering churn.
    >>
    >>
    >> Obsolescent SKUs are part of any component business of course but the
    >> article said quite clearly that OEMs, integrators and others were not
    >> pleased: they cited "scant opportunity to shift stock". Apparently this
    >> has more to do with a shortage of chipset manufacturing capacity as normal
    >> product cycles - Intel has chopped off the low, least profitable end of its
    >> chipset business long before usual expected EOL.
    >>
    >> Do you really think an OEM like Dell or Gateway, or a systems integrator,
    >> can just shift mbrd components to an alternative supplier with a different
    >> chipset that quickly and expect to keep business customers happy? Have you
    >> not heard of platform homogeneity? It's been claimed here umpteen times as
    >> the reason to stay with Intel as a chipset/mbrd supplier. You should have
    >> read the article.
    >>
    >Having had both Dell and IBM tell me they could no longer supply
    >identical servers or previously available options to existing servers, I
    >know that vendors can and do obsolete models which were "just announced"
    >product less than 15 months ago when I bought the original. IBM has
    >withdrawn CPU upgrades for units under two years old, even when the
    >parts are still being sold by Intel. These are rack mount servers, not
    >consumer goods, and not all units in a given order are always identical,
    >vendors make "running production changes" as well, under the same model
    >number.
    >
    >Those vendors also change RAID controller specs available for new
    >purchase (cards), chipsets on the built-in network hardware and/or SCSI
    >controllers, etc. And I'm told by my friend who sells Sun that other
    >vendors do that as well.
    >
    >I believe that vendors are unhappy, but it's because Intel made the
    >decision, not because no such decisions have ever been made in the past.
    >I did read the article, but didn't see much new.

    I'm not sure what the point of all the above is supposed to be - bears no
    relation to the case at hand. The fact is that, according to the story,
    the OEMs, SIs et.al. are not pleased about some unexpected discontinuity in
    Intel's product offerings, whether it be due to shortened product life
    cycles for them... or some other reason.

    > Vendors have been
    >changing things on short notice for at minimum 25 years, do you really
    >think large business customers are going to be more unhappy that the
    >change is driven by Intel instead of the OEM?

    Given that, apparently, IT buyers have had a certain confidence in a
    consistent platform strategy based on Intel's previous record, some of them
    may be seeking a scapegoat. The OEM supplier is evidently going to point
    to Intel's premature(?) withdrawal of components in the form of chipsets
    and mbrds. It just seemed to me that your suggestion that "other people
    make board, and chipsets, and CPUs" is not relevant to the IT buyers' needs
    on platform consistency.

    --
    Rgds, George Macdonald
  8. Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    "George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in
    message news:5pa4j1h04evj1decnn6gpmn45s60ius86o@4ax.com...
    > On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 20:40:19 GMT, Bill Davidsen
    > <davidsen@deathstar.prodigy.com> wrote:
    >
    >>George Macdonald wrote:
    >>> On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:06:11 GMT, Bill Davidsen
    >>> <davidsen@deathstar.prodigy.com> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>Intel desktop mobos face mass extinction
    >>>>>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26082
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>I don't understand why you think this is important. Some product is
    >>>>being discontinued, car makers do that all the time. More to the
    >>>>point,
    >>>>unless you believe Intel is never going to have any new products,
    >>>>this
    >>>>"roadmap" only shows part of the info, so that the article can draw
    >>>>the
    >>>>most alarming conclusions.
    >>>>
    >>>>I admit that there are a few board there I have used, but other
    >>>>people
    >>>>make board, and chipsets, and CPUs. I fail to see anything but normal
    >>>>product offering churn.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Obsolescent SKUs are part of any component business of course but the
    >>> article said quite clearly that OEMs, integrators and others were not
    >>> pleased: they cited "scant opportunity to shift stock". Apparently
    >>> this
    >>> has more to do with a shortage of chipset manufacturing capacity as
    >>> normal
    >>> product cycles - Intel has chopped off the low, least profitable end
    >>> of its
    >>> chipset business long before usual expected EOL.
    >>>
    >>> Do you really think an OEM like Dell or Gateway, or a systems
    >>> integrator,
    >>> can just shift mbrd components to an alternative supplier with a
    >>> different
    >>> chipset that quickly and expect to keep business customers happy?
    >>> Have you
    >>> not heard of platform homogeneity? It's been claimed here umpteen
    >>> times as
    >>> the reason to stay with Intel as a chipset/mbrd supplier. You should
    >>> have
    >>> read the article.
    >>>
    >>Having had both Dell and IBM tell me they could no longer supply
    >>identical servers or previously available options to existing servers,
    >>I
    >>know that vendors can and do obsolete models which were "just
    >>announced"
    >>product less than 15 months ago when I bought the original. IBM has
    >>withdrawn CPU upgrades for units under two years old, even when the
    >>parts are still being sold by Intel. These are rack mount servers, not
    >>consumer goods, and not all units in a given order are always
    >>identical,
    >>vendors make "running production changes" as well, under the same model
    >>number.
    >>
    >>Those vendors also change RAID controller specs available for new
    >>purchase (cards), chipsets on the built-in network hardware and/or SCSI
    >>controllers, etc. And I'm told by my friend who sells Sun that other
    >>vendors do that as well.
    >>
    >>I believe that vendors are unhappy, but it's because Intel made the
    >>decision, not because no such decisions have ever been made in the
    >>past.
    >>I did read the article, but didn't see much new.
    >
    > I'm not sure what the point of all the above is supposed to be - bears
    > no
    > relation to the case at hand. The fact is that, according to the
    > story,
    > the OEMs, SIs et.al. are not pleased about some unexpected
    > discontinuity in
    > Intel's product offerings, whether it be due to shortened product life
    > cycles for them... or some other reason.
    >
    >> Vendors have been
    >>changing things on short notice for at minimum 25 years, do you really
    >>think large business customers are going to be more unhappy that the
    >>change is driven by Intel instead of the OEM?
    >
    > Given that, apparently, IT buyers have had a certain confidence in a
    > consistent platform strategy based on Intel's previous record, some of
    > them
    > may be seeking a scapegoat. The OEM supplier is evidently going to
    > point
    > to Intel's premature(?) withdrawal of components in the form of
    > chipsets
    > and mbrds. It just seemed to me that your suggestion that "other
    > people
    > make board, and chipsets, and CPUs" is not relevant to the IT buyers'
    > needs
    > on platform consistency.
    >
    > --
    > Rgds, George Macdonald

    Soounds to me like the resellers are irritated that they didn't get
    advance notice so they could sell their stock at full price before Intel
    let the public in on the fact that these boards/chipsets were prematurely
    obsolete.

    If you want a system that will be supported for the long term and in
    which the installed base is considered, I know where to buy them.

    del
  9. Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    Del Cecchi wrote:
    > "George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in
    > message news:5pa4j1h04evj1decnn6gpmn45s60ius86o@4ax.com...
    >
    >>On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 20:40:19 GMT, Bill Davidsen
    >><davidsen@deathstar.prodigy.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>George Macdonald wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:06:11 GMT, Bill Davidsen
    >>>><davidsen@deathstar.prodigy.com> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Intel desktop mobos face mass extinction
    >>>>>>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26082
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I don't understand why you think this is important. Some product is
    >>>>>being discontinued, car makers do that all the time. More to the
    >>>>>point,
    >>>>>unless you believe Intel is never going to have any new products,
    >>>>>this
    >>>>>"roadmap" only shows part of the info, so that the article can draw
    >>>>>the
    >>>>>most alarming conclusions.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I admit that there are a few board there I have used, but other
    >>>>>people
    >>>>>make board, and chipsets, and CPUs. I fail to see anything but normal
    >>>>>product offering churn.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Obsolescent SKUs are part of any component business of course but the
    >>>>article said quite clearly that OEMs, integrators and others were not
    >>>>pleased: they cited "scant opportunity to shift stock". Apparently
    >>>>this
    >>>>has more to do with a shortage of chipset manufacturing capacity as
    >>>>normal
    >>>>product cycles - Intel has chopped off the low, least profitable end
    >>>>of its
    >>>>chipset business long before usual expected EOL.
    >>>>
    >>>>Do you really think an OEM like Dell or Gateway, or a systems
    >>>>integrator,
    >>>>can just shift mbrd components to an alternative supplier with a
    >>>>different
    >>>>chipset that quickly and expect to keep business customers happy?
    >>>>Have you
    >>>>not heard of platform homogeneity? It's been claimed here umpteen
    >>>>times as
    >>>>the reason to stay with Intel as a chipset/mbrd supplier. You should
    >>>>have
    >>>>read the article.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>Having had both Dell and IBM tell me they could no longer supply
    >>>identical servers or previously available options to existing servers,
    >>>I
    >>>know that vendors can and do obsolete models which were "just
    >>>announced"
    >>>product less than 15 months ago when I bought the original. IBM has
    >>>withdrawn CPU upgrades for units under two years old, even when the
    >>>parts are still being sold by Intel. These are rack mount servers, not
    >>>consumer goods, and not all units in a given order are always
    >>>identical,
    >>>vendors make "running production changes" as well, under the same model
    >>>number.
    >>>
    >>>Those vendors also change RAID controller specs available for new
    >>>purchase (cards), chipsets on the built-in network hardware and/or SCSI
    >>>controllers, etc. And I'm told by my friend who sells Sun that other
    >>>vendors do that as well.
    >>>
    >>>I believe that vendors are unhappy, but it's because Intel made the
    >>>decision, not because no such decisions have ever been made in the
    >>>past.
    >>>I did read the article, but didn't see much new.
    >>
    >>I'm not sure what the point of all the above is supposed to be - bears
    >>no
    >>relation to the case at hand. The fact is that, according to the
    >>story,
    >>the OEMs, SIs et.al. are not pleased about some unexpected
    >>discontinuity in
    >>Intel's product offerings, whether it be due to shortened product life
    >>cycles for them... or some other reason.
    >>
    >>
    >>>Vendors have been
    >>>changing things on short notice for at minimum 25 years, do you really
    >>>think large business customers are going to be more unhappy that the
    >>>change is driven by Intel instead of the OEM?
    >>
    >>Given that, apparently, IT buyers have had a certain confidence in a
    >>consistent platform strategy based on Intel's previous record, some of
    >>them
    >>may be seeking a scapegoat. The OEM supplier is evidently going to
    >>point
    >>to Intel's premature(?) withdrawal of components in the form of
    >>chipsets
    >>and mbrds. It just seemed to me that your suggestion that "other
    >>people
    >>make board, and chipsets, and CPUs" is not relevant to the IT buyers'
    >>needs
    >>on platform consistency.
    >>
    >>--
    >>Rgds, George Macdonald
    >
    >
    > Soounds to me like the resellers are irritated that they didn't get
    > advance notice so they could sell their stock at full price before Intel
    > let the public in on the fact that these boards/chipsets were prematurely
    > obsolete.
    >
    > If you want a system that will be supported for the long term and in
    > which the installed base is considered, I know where to buy them.
    >
    Don't keep us in suspense, tell us where. I've been seeing "running
    production changes" from IBM, HP, and Dell for several decades now, so I
    want to hear which established vendor sells rackmount systems which
    never change.

    Not that it's an issue, as long as the system is functionally the same.
    Servers matter less than office machines, where I've had systems
    rejected because they weren't quite the same color as the last batch.
    --
    bill davidsen
    SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
    http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com
  10. Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    Bill Davidsen wrote:
    > Del Cecchi wrote:
    >
    >
    >>
    >>
    snip
    >>
    >> Soounds to me like the resellers are irritated that they didn't get
    >> advance notice so they could sell their stock at full price before
    >> Intel let the public in on the fact that these boards/chipsets were
    >> prematurely obsolete.
    >>
    >> If you want a system that will be supported for the long term and in
    >> which the installed base is considered, I know where to buy them.
    >>
    > Don't keep us in suspense, tell us where. I've been seeing "running
    > production changes" from IBM, HP, and Dell for several decades now, so I
    > want to hear which established vendor sells rackmount systems which
    > never change.
    >
    > Not that it's an issue, as long as the system is functionally the same.
    > Servers matter less than office machines, where I've had systems
    > rejected because they weren't quite the same color as the last batch.

    I was coyly referring to the IBM lines of z series and i series, and I
    suppose also P series. Idon't know much about the policies of Xseries.

    I also don't know about the changes made to blade center stuff. But you
    are certainly correct. last years stuff in the PC world is considered
    obsolete, and no one much wants to buy it so they stop building it.
    Given the tight margins no one can afford to stock extra parts in case
    someone wants to order a few of last years model. Just a fact of life.

    --
    Del Cecchi
    "This post is my own and doesn’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions,
    strategies or opinions.”
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Hardware Desktops Intel Motherboards IBM