IBM over the past couple of decades have been gradually shifting away from hardware and more into a service provider. Yes they still do their mainframe style behemoths and their AS/400's (not sure what branding they have upon those now ?-series last I touched that field) and with those have consolidates much upon the power CPU (least the AS/400 stuff).
What I do wonder is - what will they do with AIX? As I do foresee it going the way of Solaris, and the parallels to their CPU architecture do seem somewhat uncanny.
Personally I have a little mixed feelings about this having used IBM's first ever attempt at a RISC CPU in the RT6150 and got one of the first (before public release) hands on the power 1 cpu used in an RS/6000.
I also do find it interesting how an instruction set is so coveted in a day and time that compilers are so mature that to create your own ISA and adapt a compiler to accommodate it is not out of the grasp of an individual and much more easier a task than days prior. But then the real hard work is designing a CPU to run that instruction set, that becomes very much more than a one-person job. Though who knows - maybe in 10-20 years from now, the ability to design some silicon becomes as accessible as programming in SCRATCH (drag and drop style design/programming).
But back to the Power Architecture, what is IBM's real plans here - charity/PR or a way to shift processor design into a realm of outsourcing that enables them to focus upon their more profitable streams and focus - like services? Maybe.
Though I do feel they may of missed the boat upon this, what with Apple at one stage a big Power cpu user and now looking to shift towards ARM, of which they design their own CPU's. Could Apple embrace this opertunity or would the transition be a cross to hard for them to bear? That is for me one of the signs on how this will traction. If Apple shows interest, then this could be epicly big. Not saying that if they don't that it will fail. But do feel that had they did this 5-10 years ago, things would of been more likely to traction and grow. Today, beyond some niche area's, I'm not so sure it will be as epic as it could of been and may just be a case of too little too late.
Equally I'm mindful that whilst IMHO it is too late to have as big an impact as it could of been, it may prove damaging towards RISC V CPU progression and by splitting the options open - may well damage both and only aid the existing Intel and Arm options out there.
What I do wonder is - what will they do with AIX? As I do foresee it going the way of Solaris, and the parallels to their CPU architecture do seem somewhat uncanny.
Personally I have a little mixed feelings about this having used IBM's first ever attempt at a RISC CPU in the RT6150 and got one of the first (before public release) hands on the power 1 cpu used in an RS/6000.
I also do find it interesting how an instruction set is so coveted in a day and time that compilers are so mature that to create your own ISA and adapt a compiler to accommodate it is not out of the grasp of an individual and much more easier a task than days prior. But then the real hard work is designing a CPU to run that instruction set, that becomes very much more than a one-person job. Though who knows - maybe in 10-20 years from now, the ability to design some silicon becomes as accessible as programming in SCRATCH (drag and drop style design/programming).
But back to the Power Architecture, what is IBM's real plans here - charity/PR or a way to shift processor design into a realm of outsourcing that enables them to focus upon their more profitable streams and focus - like services? Maybe.
Though I do feel they may of missed the boat upon this, what with Apple at one stage a big Power cpu user and now looking to shift towards ARM, of which they design their own CPU's. Could Apple embrace this opertunity or would the transition be a cross to hard for them to bear? That is for me one of the signs on how this will traction. If Apple shows interest, then this could be epicly big. Not saying that if they don't that it will fail. But do feel that had they did this 5-10 years ago, things would of been more likely to traction and grow. Today, beyond some niche area's, I'm not so sure it will be as epic as it could of been and may just be a case of too little too late. Equally I'm mindful that whilst IMHO it is too late to have as big an impact as it could of been, it may prove damaging towards RISC V CPU progression and by splitting the options open - may well damage both and only aid the existing Intel and Arm options out there.