Referring to the hi-tech market of the last decade is the mention of "Wintel". PCs running Windows, the Intel chip holds an overwhelming market share. At the time, it would be no surprise if someone claimed that Microsoft and Intel would continue to shake hands to dominate the hi-tech market.
But things did not go that way. Microsoft and Intel are no longer at the top of the world. And the two big guys never shook hands.In the mid-1990s, when Microsoft was in its infancy, Intel was also the PC's benchmark with market share never below 90%. Intel's biggest rival now is AMD, which still lacks a good product - all AMD models are copies of Intel products and are often slower than rivals for years.
In 1995, a brand new name called NexGen suddenly appeared on the global semiconductor map. NexGen is much smaller than AMD but has what AMD needs: a quality x86 chip.
At this moment, miracles appear. Bill Gates suddenly expressed interest in NexGen and invited its founder, Atiq Raza, to dinner. At dinner, Gates suggested introducing Raza to AMD and confirmed that the two would work together very well. One year later, AMD acquired NexGen, and subsequently launched three architectures that competed with Intel: K6, K7 and K8.The "win" hit with "tel" is, but Intel does not like Microsoft any more. In the trial of Microsoft with its 1998 indictment, Intel issued a statement claiming that "Microsoft's vice president Paul Maritz said it would cut Netscape's breathing air by releasing a copy of this browser ".
Three years later, when Intel lost to AMD in the 64-bit race, the software giant put the AMD64 instruction set under Windows, forcing Intel to buy the technology from AMD to create the chip. prefer.
What does the Microsoft vs. Intel story mean to the dual worlds of technology?
Very simply, no company wants any single market controlled by a single power. Even the most powerful giants do not want this. In the dominant position of the PC operating system, Microsoft has a great influence on the direction of the CPU industry. On the other hand, imagine what would happen if Intel monopolized itself and raised its CPU price? It is clear that Microsoft's desire to universalize Microsoft's global reach will be affected.In general, being dependent on a single partner or letting a single power to manipulate the market can create a lot of harmful scenarios for all parties involved. Typical examples are the disastrous consequences of the Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 or Internet Explorer nightmare.
It is because every time a company becomes too dominant in a market segment, the relative strengths will certainly contribute to another company rising to become its counterpart. For example, the success of the iPhone has helped AT & T's (the exclusive distributor of the iPhone in the first few years) have a huge advantage over its competitors. T-Mobile has been the "sponsor" for Google and HTC to launch the G1 Dream, the first Android in the world. One year later, the success of the Motorola DROID was also largely due to Verizon. The operator has previously had ambitions to defeat AT & T and Apple.
All other markets will have similar shifts. MSI, ASUS, Gigabyte ... certainly would not want to rely solely on NVIDIA or ATI / AMD. The advertisers do not want to give all their fate to Google, and luckily for them, Mark Zuckerberg has come up with a very powerful weapon. The hi-tech market often becomes a two-way race.But "code" is usually the end result. Take a look at the sad story of Windows Phone: If the smartphone market is a third power, software developers will have to support one more platform. As a result, Windows Phone died because of the lack of support from even relatively neutral Facebook. Similarly, S3 Graphics died of not receiving strong support such as NVIDIA and ATI.
