I know most are suppliers on the component end, but the one that got my attention is Hon Hai Precision, which is a major end-product manufacturer.
Specifically the volume of OEM/ODM work they do for other major vendors (Apple and HP for example). The Foxconn label they produce as on their own, will only get Intel so far. I see the ability to use the OEM/ODM supplier as a means of persuading other vendors to take the plunge, whether installed on the main board products they sell to these vendors, or as an add-on card they'd supply as an optional product for those systems.
I figured this aspect was covered before in a previous post. At any rate, there are potential problems (that I do think will surface, but not sure to the degree yet, as there's still voids in the available information). Namely the supporting semiconductors necessary to make anything work with it becoming available, save connecting 2x LP equipped systems together, as was done in the demo.
USB 3.0 does have the advantage here, as it's already backwards compatible with devices users already own. For the newer standard, the necessary parts already exist, so it's not a situation of Part A is there, but B is vapor = useless for most, if not all practical purposes.
There's definitely a difference between a standard that began as an open standard (or became that shortly after it was created), and one that has it's IP held by a company or group of companies.
LP's not based on an open standard, so the companies involved would have to agree to do so before any other parts suppliers could get involved without a licensing fee. Unlike NEC, where it was, and they were just the first out with a working part. Others are following, but no license fees are involved.
No, but they were pushing it hard, and are what most consumers associate with it (I was trying to keep the example simple, as the posts are getting long). Few may actually realize that others such as Panasonic were ever involved with it from the beginning.
Money indeed. It was a good move, as there's fewer separate assemblies between the SP and DP systems. Shortens the parts bin requirements for easier production, and more importantly, saves costs.
Typing too fast. Not much different than typing MB/s instead of Mb/s mistake.
Other standards are entrenched, and won't be easily moved. I actually see LP making the largest impact on laptop systems as a means of simplification combined with a cost reduction.
For desktop systems, not as much. There would need to be some other reason, namely inexpensive speed, to cause them to go get the necessary pieces to make it all work (assuming they actually show up, as this late in the game, as none of the peripheral components have been announced that I've seen).
Workstations I hope will benefit by being able to exceed 1G E for example, for at most, similar funds. It would assist in the creation of small lower cost clusters IMO if this proves itself out (i.e makes clusters more available to independents or SMB markets that could utilize that much performance).
I actually agree here, and do suspect it's that simple, as they've been silent on those details.
What I expect, is that they differentiate this from other standards (much more complex).
I know that they make NIC's, and they'd have labs with the necessary equipment for validation testing.
But that can be bought. I think of it this way. Why build a scope, frequency generator, .... when companies like Tektronix, Agilent and Lecroy already product it?
Lasers, fibre optics, ... are areas their partners specialize in. IIRC, there's a significant amount of work put into the lasers,..., namely to get the materials and manufacturing in at a low cost.
I previously mentioned that the ability to bond is a hoped for speculation that could allow it be used for more than just a way to simplify laptop connectors.
Assuming Intel and their partners are willing to license them the technology.
But they are slow at it, as it's expensive (time consuming as it's almost certainly a major re-write). Those that haven't done it seem to be waiting for someone else to do most of the work for them (i.e. waiting for tools, OS support,...). Basically just adding new features to the same old, tired base code that's been recycled for years (finding ways of milking the product with as little development time as possible).
It sucks, but I don't see anything motivating most software developers that've been sitting on the fence, to get off and go to work.
It was just to illustrate a point in general. Yes, multiple instances of the same application or simultaneous use of multiple applications can make better use of a system. But that won't change the fact if it can't benefit from SMP, which is what the MP and XServe are really meant for (where the performance will really become apparent).
