SGI Files Chapter 11 Bankruptcy 316
audi100quattro writes "The WSJ has a story about SGI filing for bankruptcy, but the SGI Investor's Relation page doesn't say anything." Nothing else really known at this point, but this is not unexpected.
Story (Score:5, Informative)
For Chapter 11 Protection
A WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE NEWS ROUNDUP
May 8, 2006 6:56 a.m.
Silicon Graphics Inc., a long-struggling maker of high-performance computers, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
A group of bondholders agreed to trade their debt for a stake in the company, which filed for Chapter 11 protection Monday morning in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan.
SGI is known for desktop workstations and larger server systems that are favored by engineers and others who demand sophisticated graphics, including Hollywood studios. But the company has suffered a long slide, partly due to competition from machines based on standard components used in personal computers.
The company's stock was recently delisted from the New York Stock Exchange for trading below a minimum threshold of $1 a share, and now trades on the small-cap OTC Bulletin Board.
Earlier this year, SGI replaced its top executive amid widening losses and lower revenue. Last month, the company said it expected revenue of about $108 million for the third fiscal quarter, well below guidance of $140 million to $160 million.
not as bad as it seems (Score:3, Informative)
The current management is very different from the old one. It can be argued, and it has been argued before, that it was a succession of management mistakes which brought the company to its current situation. But the old mistakes seem to be a thing of the past now.
So, good engineering + bad management = financial di
Press Release (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The death of SGI (Score:5, Interesting)
SGI truly was a magical place to be. Not only the "Its Not just a job, Its a wardrobe" pens, frisbees, t-shirts for every new product, boxer shorts, key chains, and all the other swag SGI marketing was famous for. The "O" series of products, led by the Indigo2 Max-Impact were revolutionary products. Massively fast backplanes that still exceed the performance of all but a limite few systems, incredibly fast graphics sub systems with fill rates that still can't be achieved on lowly PC gear (they just can't push the bits fast enough).
In addition, SGI truly owned the internet space, well before Sun and then gave it away once Sun started the "dot in dot.com" marketing campaign. They had the NetScape server, free, included with the IRIX OS, on every server with a full HTML configuration interface in an age where most other companies still didn't have an officially supported HTTPD for their platform. They also included Indigo Magic, the FIRST full GUI HTML editor, again, free with the OS, as well as a full GUI VRML editor, and so on.
I truly weep for the company SGI used to be. It was the best job I ever had and the one I wish had never ended.
Re:The death of SGI (Score:3, Interesting)
I think (and thought at the time) they should have focused on a cheaper version of their products and tried to be an Apple alternative. They had the best OS out there until MacOS X came up, and it took a long time for MacOS X to work as well as Irix did. Most people aware of the company had very warm feelings about SGI products and the OS and I think they could have used that.
I reluctantly wound up switching from SGI hardware
Re:The death of SGI (Score:2)
Actually they did this, showing off an Indy running Photoshop at MacWorld one year. I don't know how serious they were about it.
Re:The death of SGI (Score:3, Informative)
Mosaic - and shortly afterward, Netscape - was on every platform you can name. Httpd was supported on all those platforms too. By the time the "Internet revolution" and all the hype (and corruption) that drove up the stock market in the 90s, SGI was in the beginning of it's decline.
Sure, they had a great campus, they had great people working for them, but it didn't take long for it to
Re:The death of SGI (Score:2)
I'd say their biggest mistake was bringing in Microsoft henchman Rick Beluzzo, whose philosophies didn't do much good for the creative and adaptive market that SGI was selling to.
I remember an SGI employee countered this with "We are the : in http:"
I will miss you, SGI. Thanks for your su
Re:The death of SGI (Score:2)
Hmm, an old-school *NIX vendor convinced to switch to x86 Windows NT workstations, dropping their RISC processors and OS; now where have I heard that before?
Re:The death of SGI (Score:2)
Look at all the success that Nvidia (former SGI people) has had with Wintel graphics. SGI's problem was just poor execution.
not the first gui html editor (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The death of SGI (Score:2)
Re:The death of SGI (Score:2)
SGI also really shot itself in the foot in the internet server market. They released really great hardware for the task, particulary the challenge-S, which was fast and affordable. However, they had real reliability problems and supply
Re:The death of SGI (Score:3, Insightful)
backplane speed? (Score:4, Interesting)
This say the GIO64 backplane speed in Indigo2 was 266MB/sec.
This was probably great then, given the limitations of FPM RAM (EDO wasn't even around yet!), but it is peanuts now. Intel's FSBs and AMDs HTs hover at about 30 times this speed now, and there are plenty of slots which exceed this speed too.
Am I missing something? I only looked this up because the amount of time SGI has been out of the loop pretty much means that their systems cannot be anything special compared to current hardware. That doesn't mean they weren't ahead of their time, just that a lot of time has passed and even things that were ahead of their time then are nothing special now.
I had a couple friends who work at SGI and I was heavy into the computer graphics market then. SGI were doomed before they bought Cray. They basically started by taking the work of Evans & Sutherland and bring it to a whole new marketplace. They realized the potential of computer graphics in a broader market, not just defense and similar companies. The problem was, the market was even broader than SGI expected.
Oddly, it was the horrible Matrox Mystique video card that signalled the end for SGI. It wasn't the first 3D PC card, but for many people, it was the first one they owned and used. It ran Tomb Raider with 3d acceleration. These kinds of cards created a whole new market for 3D hardware. This board marketbase pumped money into these companies (Matrox, ATI, S3, and soon after, NVidia) very quickly. And this allowed them to advance their hardware rapidly to the point where a well-equipped PC could match the 3D performance of an SGI box.
SGI was addicted to selling $80K workstations in small numbers, and PCs running 3D Studio Max that could be configured for a bit over $10K just overran them. SGI refused to adapt. Because of their overhead, perhaps it was impossible for SGI to adapt. So SGI was in a marketplace where a 3D workstation could only fetch $10K (and falling), with a business model and overhead (like owning your own CPU designer, writing your own OS) that made it impossible for them to compete.
End of SGI.
I don't understand your assertion that SGI was an internet player. The cost of their systems meant you couldn't afford to buy an SGI for anything that didn't involve heavy graphics, or else you'd be wasting your money. SUN really did rule the roost there, for a while. Until a broad switch to PCs whomped them too.
Re:The death of SGI (Score:2)
That's a pretty stupid statement considering the OS was anything but free nor was the IM code open-source.
SGI machines were great, but they were pricey and eventually lost out to cheaper/open-source alternatives.
Re:The death of SGI (Score:2)
Oh nonsense. It was precisely that "magical place" mentality that got SGI in trouble. It takes more than smart engineers to make a high-tech company. It takes a solid business plan.
Yes, the acquisition
Re:The death of SGI (Score:2)
SGI was a great company, but the management really went off into crazytown around the mid 90s or so. When your management is bad, the good people start to leave, and pretty soon you're left with just a shell of a company. Then it was one bad decision after another, buying Crey, hiring a CEO (for way too much money) with a proven track reco
Re:Press Release (Score:3, Informative)
* New CEO/CFO
* Major holders (read investors) get to keep their shares, everyone else gets nothing
* They have already reduced their size by $100M, and another $50M is coming (layoffs mostly, I imagine)
* They remain optimistic.
IMHO: They are doomed, but if the new CEO isn't just a "make it worth enough to pay off the debt" sort of guy, they could harvest the value of the Cray and SGI brands and parley them into a major product line once again. It would take the vision of a Steve Jobs type, but it cou
Re:Press Release (Score:2)
Re:Press Release (Score:2)
Re:Press Release (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Press Release (Score:2)
No, I mean in the headline--of course they need to mention it in the body of the text. Don't you think that "SGI Takes Action to Reduce Debt" is a bit euphemistic for what's happening?
Re:Press Release (Score:2)
- They quit focusing on the visualization workstation market and tried to become just another PC vendor offering Windows NT(family) workstations
- They bought Cray in effort to capture more of the supercomputer market, diluting their own Onyx offerings
- They abandoned the Windows NT market, too late, after i
Does anyone still use the SGI workstations anymore (Score:2, Informative)
So the question is are the SGI workstations worth the cost? Is SGI going to survive.
And for karma whoring here is the wikipedia index on SGI's history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Graphics [wikipedia.org]
Re:Does anyone still use the SGI workstations anym (Score:2)
I don't know; let's check their company for signs of health.
Re:Does anyone still use the SGI workstations anym (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Does anyone still use the SGI workstations anym (Score:2)
No, whether they are worth the cost has never been the question. A business man might not think that a $80 camel hair brush and a $120 tube of pigment is worth the cost, and balk at the artist demanding this instead of the much cheaper alternatives. Of course, the workstation isn't worth the cost, but that's never been the issue. The question is whether the combination of the workstation and the person working on it is
Sad (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm sad to see them go. Not surprised, but still a bit sad.
Erwin will need a new home...
Re:Sad (Score:2)
I browsed some SGI docs literally a hour ago just to make a piece of software portable to Irix -- not out of any necessity or even utility, but just because of the old fondness.
Sleep well, Indy. We'll miss you.
Re:Sad (Score:2)
Re:Sad (Score:3, Informative)
I worked with IRIX at some point of my career. Nothing impressive, mind you.
I keep hearing this from ex-Irix and Solaris users. Solaris and Irix were the best unixes at one point (1990's). However, their greatness was internal, in the kernel. Most users never got to see it.
I've never used Irix, but speaking for Solaris, the user land was pretty archaic and clumsy (the commands and utilities) compared to the GNU userland (the commands on Linux). Sun finally realised this in 2004 and started migrating the
Nothing there yet.. (Score:5, Funny)
They'll add it in with green-screen later.
Because the *real* investors just got screwed (Score:2)
What just happened is that the new CEO & CFO cut a deal to enrich bankers (who held "secured" bonds) at the cost of the people who put their trust and money in SGI. So the guys who really belived in SGI all these years, who supported it, and who bought SGI's stock or bonds just got completely 100% screwed by a back room deal.
Well at least
Re:Because the *real* investors just got screwed (Score:2)
As the Enron debacle showed, having a majority of your retirement tied up in your employer's stock is unwise. Something about eggs and baskets. Business rarely rewards loyalty on the downside of things, particularly if the company is publicly traded.
To be perfectly honest... (Score:5, Insightful)
Terribly sad (Score:4, Interesting)
I know it was inevitable. I know the economics. I know various other things but still...still...it's a sad, sad day.
Cheers,
Ian
Re:Terribly sad (Score:2)
At least, respect for OpenGL folks!
Or if you have a EA game or something , look at the credits at the last page of manual. Always some SGI libs involved.
Re:Terribly sad (Score:4, Interesting)
Ok - time for a bit of a sad old-timer rant (feel free to skip if you think computers always came with Windows)
<rant>
I really miss the magic that was there in some of those old companies - DEC, SGI, H-P... back when IBM was the big enemy and the biggest thrill I had was reading some new press release and thinking of ways to really do something cool with it. I remember looking at the camera on the old SGI screens and wondering if Jetson style video-phones were right around the corner. I remember running a lab of Indy workstations and feeling like I had the monopoly on "cool". Back when Windows still needed Trumpet WinSock and I was playing MUDs halfway across the country on an AlphaStation.
I've never seen a documentation system as nice as "help" before or since. Compilers that took *any* major language and optimized it really well. A database (RDB) that ran so well that when we ported it to Sun it took 5 times the hardware dollars to make it work. Oracle doesn't hold a candle to it...
How about real clustering? How about a software company that makes defacto standards so effective EVERYONE uses them (like OpenGL or GLUT?)
Why is it that things like "external processors", "clustering", and "grid computing", keep getting touted as though they were new? Do any of these self-proclaimed Unix gurus even *know* why tty is called that?
For all the people who think Microsoft invented BASIC - for people who don't know that edit/tpu is the answer to the question of "vi or emacs" - and for those who have never had a RACF account; I pity you. You missed out on some of the really cool parts of the computer age. Heck, I bet a lot of the younger people on here never even coded stuff for GLIDE... and that was a *PC* level tech (and a nice one!).
I am saddened by the demise of the "science" part of computer science. In this era is there still room for wonder? As much as I delight in the cross compatibility and functionality of the new computers, I am saddened more by the lack of people who truly appreciate how we got them. It's probably the same feeling that the last steam train engineers felt as diesel engines took over - or perhaps the feeling modern diesel engineers feel at the trucks and planes that have largely replaced them.
Oh well. We've all had this discussion before, and I guess I'm just getting too old. At least one benefit of all that is having two VNC sessions open to WinXP and 5 terminals open to my Sun servers on my MBP with the full OpenGL desktop.
</rant>
-WS
Re:Terribly sad (Score:2)
some of my best memories (job related) were from those old companies. DEC had a definite east-coast feel but was still a seriouly fun place to be. SGI was quite the west-coast place (very california feel to it) and was maybe the 2nd most fun work place I've been at. the mtn view campus (where I was) had some 25 buildings when I was there (around y2k or so). now, google stole many of them (sigh).
when I i
Re:Terribly sad (Score:2)
I don't see any reason there can't be a workstation market today.
Unexpected (Score:5, Insightful)
Old age is the most unexpected [accelerating.org] of things that can happen to a man. -- Trotsky
I guess Autodesk cares (Score:2)
Something died inside of us all... (Score:5, Interesting)
You've got to put your belief in the little guy on the street if you want to survive, being boss - playing big, with the big - will only work until the rest of us grow up. And we did, but SGI didn't invest in our future together, if they did - we would have embraced them without as much as a seconds hesitation, but if you keep selling to the elite party (those with WAY too much money) you're out of tune with the development.
(For those too thick to read between the lines - it simply ment, they didn't follow the times)
Re:Something died inside of us all... (Score:3, Interesting)
When the 386 appeared on the scene and it became feasible
Re:Something died inside of us all... (Score:2)
Ever heard about a company called nvidia? ever read some discussions about why their Linux drivers cannot be open sourced even if nvidia would want to?
Investor Relations Info (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.sgi.com/company_info/newsroom/press_re
From the release:
"As part of this agreement with many of its major stakeholders, and as the next step in its previously announced plan to reorganize its businesses, the Company and its U.S. subsidiaries have filed voluntary petitions under chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. SGI's non-U.S. subsidiaries, including European, Canadian, Mexican, South American and Asia Pacific subsidiaries were not included in the filing; will continue their business operations without supervision from the U.S. courts; and will not be subject to the requirements of chapter 11. The Company expects to file its Plan of Reorganization reflecting the agreement shortly, and to emerge from Chapter 11 within six months."
One less icon for Slashdot to manage (Score:2, Informative)
SGI collectors items (Score:3, Funny)
Woooot!
Chip H.
Sad. I loved using their Reality Engines (Score:2)
I am not a computer graphics specialist, but it was great to work with full screen graphics at a high frame rate. The artistic types at Angel Studios where I worked created amazing 3d models, textures, and environments - really, some of the most fun I ever had working.
Re:Sad. I loved using their Reality Engines (Score:2)
I am not a hardware guy, but it was neat using early U64 protoypes.
Totally off topic, but I still enjoy my U64 - my grandson and I still enjoy some of the older games like Star Wars a lot.
Sorry to see them go... (Score:5, Informative)
Heck, I use a Powerbook G4 for most of my tasks these days and my SGI O2 and SGI 320 NT box in my office are used little these days, but the Macs do lack some advanced hardware features that are only available on Infinite Reality gfx boards and Tezro v12. See Discreet's website and you'll notice that Flame, Inferno and Fire still run on ONLY SGI hardware. SGI InfiniteReality boards are used as image generators for flight military flight simulators and also to drive the Inferno compositing and film mastering, using up to 32 film resolution layers and 10-bit anti-aliased graphics
Sure, Nvidia and ATI cards go have an polygon count advantage and they do have features like pixel and vertex shaders, but overall for high fidelity graphics one still goes back to SGIs. If one looks at what is capable in Final Cut Pro HD, it still falls in terms of output quality compared to what an SGI can handle. For video DMediaPro options with support for two streams of high-definition 10-bit 4:4:4:4 RGBA video. Or if one needed to generate your own video signal. Programmable FPGA video card or drive a C.A.V.E. or Powerwall SGI Mutichannel Option cards are capable of doing this. I have yet to see PC based Image Generator be as successful at doing this without a lot of hacking, blood, sweat and tears. SGI's handle the tough visualization tasks do out of the box. SGI's gfx API are second to none
OpenGL Inventor
OpenGL Multipipe (+ SDK)
OpenGL Optimizer
OpenGL Performer
OpenGL Shader
OpenGL Vizserver
OpenGL Volumizer
ImageVision and Image Format Library (IFL)
SGI was a great company, although it was badly mismanaged. I'd love to see it merged with Apple and all the SGI gfx API's integrated into OS X. Plus other tecnologies like ccNUMA, XFS, CXFS, NUMAlink4 (6.4GBs), NUMAflex combined with Hypertransport and Infiniband (when customers need cheaper solution than NUMAlink)
Re:Sorry to see them go... (Score:2)
How so? I was under the impression FCP has caught up with SGI -- if it hasn't, why have a fair number of Hollywood full-length films been made with FCP?
I'm not trying to flame -- I'm actually interested in how FCP falls short.
But even if the OP is correct and FCP still doesn't compare with SGI, FCP has the advantage of being relatively inexpensive. Every college student film ty
Re:Sorry to see them go... (Score:3, Informative)
This is no longer true. Discreet has now ported all of their software to Linux PCs. Even the Inferno (which was the last). I was at NAB last week (major tradeshow for the media busin
Re:Sorry to see them go... (Score:3, Interesting)
1. Current Linux distributions can run workstation level hardware/software.
2. x86-compatible machines now have powerful enough CPU's to run workstation level hardware/software.
3. High-end graphics cards using the nVidia Quadro GPU chipset can do most of what SGI machines can do in terms of graphics but at much lower cost.
Why do you think Dreamworks Animation is using AMD CPU boxes with high-end graphics cards running Linux?
SGI Workstations (Score:3, Interesting)
How about.... HyperTransport-links between CPU's, integrated mem-controllers, on-die L2-caches, HTX-expansion, multicore, multi-CPU-setups. All this, and running Linux. Hell, those changes alone would give us a nice boost, even if the CPU-core (R16000A IIRC) itself stayed relatively same.
Re:SGI Workstations (Score:2, Informative)
Between both distro's, most of SGI's systems from the Indy to the Octane are supported (although support for the individual components is dependent on the machine). We're hoping to get our hands on some of their newer stuff, like a Fuel or an Origin 300 to see how hard that will be to port to (especially the R14000), but the dream is
Re:SGI Workstations (Score:2)
Hi Kumba, long time no see :). Anyway, I wouldn't call Linux on SGI's workstations "usable". It may work well on some machines, but some are very hard to get working at all. And the latesst models (Tezro and Fuel) are right out of the question. I have been to the gentoo-forums, and I have seen people struggle with Linux-MIPS. When the users can pick just about any SGI-workstation and expect to be able to use Linux there (and in such way that it actua
Re:SGI Workstations (Score:2)
Sounds like you're talking about Opteron.
Re:SGI Workstations (Score:2)
Really.... why? MIPS CPU's still have a place in the embedded market, maybe, though I'm not sure I wouldn't pick ARM instead.
In the workstation market they are a doormat to Intel and AMD these days. SGI cratered in the workstation business years ago because they bet everything on MIPS and they simply didn't have the resources to keep MIPS competitive with better funded rivals. Oh and then they bet on Itanium w
SGI is now a good bargain (Score:5, Insightful)
What do you get (of any value) when you snap up SGI?
-XFS/XVM/CXFS - one of the best storage environments out there in production
-OpenGL/VAN
-DMF/TMF
-GRIO
-Numerous other subsystems to IRIX/Linux
Their hardware hasn't kept pace as well. However, there's still a lot to like about the architecture (HyperTransport looks so much like SGI-Craylink). They're about the only ones who managed to make something useful of Itanium (another straw on the camel's back). Perhaps someone could do something with it, provided they supply the needed R&D money.
Now is the time... (Score:4, Informative)
It's sad to see them go, and not just for their cool h/w. This is the company that brought us OpenGL and, for a long time, the only useful STL documentation on the web (not to mention Irix had a working c++ compiler). I can almost forgive them for IRIX 6.5.
To the memory of SGI (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:To the memory of SGI (Score:2)
Nice systems, but the company was a pain to deal/w (Score:2, Interesting)
A $3000 Indy might have seemed like a good deal, but when you need a thousand dollars a year worth of hardware and software contracts to support basic administration of the box, it didn't compare too well with its competition.
Of course, my
Re:Nice systems, but the company was a pain to dea (Score:2)
Processor confusion (Score:2)
Sir, such a product does not exist. I think you must have dreamed it.
The Power label was reserved exclusively for R8000 workstations and servers, and the Challenge series never supported R12K processors.
Oh No! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Oh No! (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.opengl.org/ [opengl.org]
Whatever (sad!) happens, nothing happens to OpenGL.
Look at members
http://opengl.org/about/arb/overview/ [opengl.org]
It is kind of similar to hardware, the PowerPC board. So when Apple gives up PowerPC, nothing happens to powerPC since
http://www.power.org/kshowcase/view/browse_profile s/mp_browse [power.org]
If Apple did not give up powerPC and it went chap. 11, Power Architecture would still continue.
I thank SGI for a lot of my early career... (Score:3, Interesting)
It was SIGGRAPH 2000. New Orleans. I got an invite to the SGI party, and we were all expecting a huge new announcement of a SGI-brand PC graphics card. This would have been the smart move, because about this time PC cards were starting to eat into SGI's markets... So why not use the amazing brand name of SGI and produce a killer PC card? So what did SGI announce? A new line of supercomputers. There were audible groans in the crowd.
Oh well, it was part of history. My Indy still works just fine, and I was even able to update to a newer version of Irix recently... And I'll still wear my SGI shirts, thankyouverymuch
Clusters (Score:2)
From where I sit, SGI are primarily a high performance computing company, hence their Altix range. The problem is that 95% of HPC problems run just fine on a cluster, and there just isn't enough business in the 5% of us who's problems
Market share? (Score:2)
If you cant really *move* in a lively and limber way when your survival depends on it - to either keep up with the times or keep out of an alligators jaws - time rolls on without you.
If a company spends its days _anchored_ in a particular mode of oper
Funny (and sad) how times change (Score:2)
A few days after SGI was delisted [google.com], I stumbled across an old (1994) article about SGI [wired.com] while I was poking around in one of my favorite places, the Wired archive [wired.com].
(I'm a huge computer history junkie--if nothing else is happening, I can amuse myself for hours digging up old computer stuff on the web. And if you're ever in the San Francisco Bay Area, I highly recommend visiting the Computer History museum [computerhistory.org].)
Anyway, the article has this quote from SGI founder Jim Clark [wikipedia.org]:
Clark
Single system image supercomputing (Score:2)
Investor Relations page (Score:2)
Sad day indeed :( (Score:2)
Over the years, IRIX and SGI have been good to me. Thought I would put a few things down here that were worth it:
-never lost a filesystem. Many folks I worked with carried their configuration from machine type to machine type over the years. (indy, o2, octane)
-love the interactivity of the desktop. Still do actually. It's clean, fast and makes sense. The extra desks fun
Like Abe Vigoda... (Score:2)
Re:Does this suprise anyone? (Score:2)
Standard Template Library (Score:5, Informative)
My question is; where they contributing anything new to the maket recently
It may not be all that "recent", but if you're a C++ programmer, you might want to download a copy of this documentation before the bankruptcy trustees pull the plug on the server:
Re:Does this suprise anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think they stopped doing what they were doing - they just never came up with a strategy to handle the new reality.
Re:Does this suprise anyone? (Score:2)
I did as well and we were replacing simulators based around SGI Crimson and newer (mid to late 90's era SGI equipment) with a simultator built around Dell P4 desktops with a rack of Quantum3D image generators (Dual P3 systems with 1GB ram)
Re:Does this suprise anyone? (Score:2)
There was a lot of work going on with ASIC design and also some playing with SGI kit for software simulation but the writing was on the wall that 'simple' off-the-peg kit could do better than we were doing with banks of CPU boards and at a cost far cheaper than 'specialist' stuff like SGI and MicroVAX.
Re:Does this suprise anyone? (Score:2)
Ah, but they did. During the "bad years" under Rick Belluzzo, SGI's then very competitive engineering was halted, in favor of turning SGI into a competitor for HP and Dell (Rick came from HP). SGI marched to orders to become a "NT workstation reseller." What a collossal mistake. Now they were beholden to Microsoft for any support of their brilliant engineering (the best video hardw
Re:Does this suprise anyone? (Score:2)
From the press release on Yahoo: This reorganization is planned with no disruption to day-to-day customer and partner activities as the Company positions itself to recapture mindshare and market share. Over the last 100 days, the Company under the leadership of its new management team has had several significant achievements. During this time it has:
Re:Does this suprise anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
Big hardware companies need to seriously change their outlook - if it can be done with a PC, it will eventually be done with a PC cheaply, the question is not what the "box" does, it's who's the best at providing the service.
Re:"If it can be done with a PC" (Score:2)
If you're alluding to the iPod, Apple may have a lot of iPod's out there but how strong a showing do you think they would have today with the average joe if it wernt for the iTunes service. That service has enabled them to capture the market over everyone else very quickly.
Re:"If it can be done with a PC" (Score:2)
Re:"If it can be done with a PC" (Score:2)
The old Apple systems had been soundly beat on Photoshop/$ for years, and their pro market has become less and less relevant to Apple as the years passed.
However, in the consumer market, the extreme cheapness of hardware has actually helped A
Re:Does this suprise anyone? (Score:2)
Basically competeing with the high end SUN and low end CRAY setups, from the info I have read about these chap 11 fileings, they are just removeing some old debts and have been promi
Re:Does this suprise anyone? (Score:3, Insightful)
XFS (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm using this on a couple of machines. I sure hope that somebody will continue to maintain it.
This bankrupcy doesn't surprise me at all. I saw this coming for more than five years. But I remember having arguments with SGI fans who tried to defend the Indefensible.
Re:Does this suprise anyone? (Score:2)
We had a lab full of SG machines when I worked for the Geography Dept at Adelaide University about 10-12 years ago. They were sweet. _Really_ fast, and gorgeous graphics.
Re:Does this suprise anyone? (Score:2)
last edition of ModSAF on SGIs, a couple jarheads put together a more effective urban combat
training system in their spare time -- based on multiplayer DOOM.
Re:Does this suprise anyone? (Score:2)
Re:When a corporation goes down.. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:3dfx was minor player but... (Score:2)
Re:3dfx was minor player but... (Score:2)
Yeah, pretty much.
Re:They needed to repeat the success of the Indy. (Score:3, Insightful)
There are few things that spot opportunities as well as companies competing for space. The lack of offerings indicates the lack of a consumer market - it indicates that those who want non x-86 Unix-like desktops (and I would love to see a Niagara, MIPS, XCPU, Cell or ARM-based desktop computer - I love diversity) are very few.
Modern x86 PCs, as dull as they are, are quite capable Unix workstations and, in many respects, are well beyond any desktop system
Re:OpenGL? (Score:4, Informative)
No.
and now that SGI will more than likely be leaving the playing field, wont this mean that OGL will belong to microsoft?
No, the OpenGL ARB controls OpenGL, not SGI. Check the website [opengl.org].
who will more than likely take it, lock it up, and sue the living fuck out of anyone who implements it? (read, makes free software implementations without paying absurd royalty costs)
No. SGI is far from the most important company relying on OpenGL. Check the ARB member list: 3DLabs, Apple, ATI, Dell, IBM, Intel, NVIDIA, SGI, and Sun Microsystems.
OpenGL is fine.
Re:Who "owns" OpenGL? (Score:2)