Inside the XBOX 360
-
Ars Technica has a couple of articles on the new Microsoft XBOX 360, (Inside the Xbox 360, part I: procedural synthesis and dynamic worlds and Inside the Xbox 360, Part II: the Xenon CPU). They are interesting looks at the ways in which the XBOX evolved and some of the decisions made regarding the technology.
In the first article, there is a little talk about using IBM for the CPU and one quote in particular, caught my eye:
IBM drew on the results of the same Broadband Processor Architecture (BPA) initiative that produced the Playstation 3's Cell processor in order to furnish the next-generation Xbox with a truly next-generation core that looks set to last at least the five-year life of the average game console.
Wow. IBM chosen because they are also working with Sony on the main competitor of the XBOX. I'm sure that Sony wasn't thrilled about some of that research being used to fuel the XBOX, but there's probably not much they can do about it. I know that Microsoft has done similar things with SQL Server in hiring away, or getting talented people that have worked on competing database platforms to come work on SQL Server.
I've heard numerous press releases over the years about people moving to Microsoft to work for them from a competitor, but I don't think I've ever seen a high profile developer or researcher move away from Microsoft. You'd think that if Oracle, DB/2, or someone else hired away someone from the SQL Server team we'd hear about it. It would be an interesting coup.
Maybe they still see themselves as superior to SQL Server and wouldn't admit they hired someone? Maybe Microsoft sees themselves still as playing catch up and the publicity helps?
All I know is other databases are getting management tools more like SQL Server. Not the other way around.
Steve Jones
-
All I know is other databases are getting management tools more like SQL Server. Not the other way around.
That's purely because the Users are asking for those features, most likely because they've used the SQL tools or seen them. It's much of a muchness. I find that MySQL has some good tools that SQL Server doesn't.
MS probably hire people away from other projects to slow down / hamper the project rather than enhance their own.
-
Ironic that as MS walks towards IBM, they meet Apple coming the other way.
...
-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
-
{quote}You'd think that if Oracle, DB/2, or someone else hired away someone from the SQL Server team we'd hear about it. It would be an interesting coup.
I am sure it would be headline news. The question that should be asked is how can MS hire people away from competiors and why competiors can not hire people away from MS.
An easy answer. MS knows that success depends on people. They hire people who share the drive and talent to push technology to the limits. Encourage them to push and do not punish them for failure (as long as they are working hard). Perhaps because the company's management started as programmers they know that not everything you try will work. Some where I read that Bill Gates has stated that he wants to hire the best in the business (people like himself) as he would rather work with them than have them competing aganist him. Others can match the money MS pays but they can not match the drive and vision of its managers and employees who share the vision.
Mike
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply