HP plans to launch memristor, silicon photonic computer within the decade

[gohpep]

At the HP Discover conference, HP announced 'The Machine', an ambitious new computer running on a custom Linux distro made by HP.

 

The Machine mashes up many different emerging computing ideas together, memristor, making it the world's first silicon photonic and memristor computer. The Machine will use "electrons for processing, photons for communication, and ions for storage." Ions will be used in the memristors, electrons will be used as they are used today in the processor, and the photons will be used for optical interconnects for faster data transfers. It sounds very ambitious, containing not one but three risky new components, the third being their new operating system.

 

In order to take advantage of this vast amount of dense, fast, persistent storage, HP announced that they will be making an open source Linux distro alongside their new computer, after thanking Microsoft for sponsoring their conference.

 

Although of this sounds great, many different memory technologies have been announced that sound revolutionary on paper but have not survived general use or cost effectiveness, with DRAM and NAND still remaining the kings of memory.

 

HP plans to have finished the memristor DIMMs by 2016, preparing for a launch by the end of the decade, with earliest launch estimates at 2017. Price details were of course not announced. Although, I may note that this project is not on HP's official timeline, and is a HP Labs project, which may mean we may not see this machine sold to the general public, or it may be scrapped early in research.

 

The Machine and the Discover conference come after declining profit at HP, which they blame in part on Microsoft and it's risky bet, Windows 8.

 

Source

[jakem1]

The Machine and the Discover conference come after declining profit at HP, which they blame in part on Microsoft and it's risky bet, Windows 8.

 

Strange that Lenovo haven't had the same problem with Windows 8 ;)

[gohpep]

Strange that Lenovo haven't had the same problem with Windows 8 ;)

It's always easier to blame someone else rather than doing something about it (making better laptops)

[simplezz]

It's always easier to blame someone else rather than doing something about it (making better laptops)

That may be true, but you have to admit, Windows 8 didn't do OEM's any favours now did it?

[simplezz]

Strange that Lenovo haven't had the same problem with Windows 8 ;)

From the sales numbers, Lenovo seems to be the exception to the rule. Everyone else's sales are declining, which alone suggests a widespread downwards trend. Eventually it will catch up to Lenovo. Besides, don't forget that they still sell Windows 7 devices. Once that reaches EOL we'll see just how popular Microsoft's Metro interface really is.

[simplezz]

I'd hardly call it backstabbing. FOSS OS' like GNU/Linux allow much greater customisation. It's the go-to OS for new concepts and hardware. Why do you think all super computers run a FOSS OS?

[Skiver Veteran]

Thread title edited

 

I don't understand where any backstabbing or Microsoft come into this, please refrain from inventing titles for extenal articles.

[gohpep]

I'd hardly call it backstabbing. FOSS OS' like GNU/Linux allow much greater customisation. It's the go-to OS for new concepts and hardware. Why do you think all super computers run a FOSS OS?

No the backstabbing part was them thanking Microsoft for being one of the major sponsors of their conference, to then go on to say that they'll abandon Windows, but I guess it is an exaggeration.

Super computers run open source software so it can be greatly tuned for its specific purpose.

Thread title edited

 

I don't understand where any backstabbing or Microsoft come into this, please refrain from inventing titles for extenal articles.

Sorry.

[Max Norris]

No the backstabbing part was them thanking Microsoft for being one of the major sponsors of their conference, to then go on to say that they'll abandon Windows, but I guess it is an exaggeration.

Microsoft also invests in the open source world too, have done that for years. They've even contributed a fair bit to the kernel, was even in the top 20 contributor list for a while. That said, you're right with your previous post, HP hasn't exactly been pushing the boundaries either with their offerings, getting fairly stale versus what others have been doing.

 

Besides, don't forget that they still sell Windows 7 devices. Once that reaches EOL we'll see just how popular Microsoft's Metro interface really is.

Good thing it takes all of 3 seconds to customize it so it doesn't bother you again. ;)

[gohpep]

Microsoft also invests in the open source world too, have done that for years. They've even contributed a fair bit to the kernel, was even in the top 20 contributor list for a while. That said, you're right with your previous post, HP hasn't exactly been pushing the boundaries either with their offerings, getting fairly stale versus what others have been doing.

While I do agree Microsoft doesn't hate open source or Linux, it's just I think that Microsoft would rather have OEMs use computers with Windows.

[Max Norris]

While I do agree Microsoft doesn't hate open source or Linux, it's just I think that Microsoft would rather have OEMs use computers with Windows.

Sure, no argument there, but this new system sounds experimental at best for at least a few years, if it even ever gets sold to the public at all, and if it's a supercomputer sort of setup, it's not really their thing anyway. They have Windows HPC sure, but it's not exactly a high priority for them, not their target market. On the flip side, I'm surprised they haven't gone and made their own distro yet though, they've sold Unix in the past, do something along the lines of SUSE Enterprise or RHEL and tie in their own services with it along with support. Server oriented stuff obviously, not desktop, they've already cornered that market.

[gohpep]

Sure, no argument there, but this new system sounds experimental at best for at least a few years, if it even ever gets sold to the public at all, and if it's a supercomputer sort of setup, it's not really their thing anyway. They have Windows HPC sure, but it's not exactly a high priority for them, not their target market. On the flip side, I'm surprised they haven't gone and made their own distro yet though, they've sold Unix in the past, do something along the lines of SUSE Enterprise or RHEL and tie in their own services with it along with support.

Yeah it's not even part of the actual companies plans, it's an HP Labs projects. It'll probably be forgotten like the hundreds of innovative Microsoft Research projects that have been announced before, and I don't really see a need for this kind of data density for consumers.

[Osiris]

I have no idea what I just read but if they expect to sell it I hope they find some better words as the memristor, silicon photonic computer just doesn't roll off the tongue.

[simplezz]

Microsoft also invests in the open source world too, have done that for years. They've even contributed a fair bit to the kernel, was even in the top 20 contributor list for a while.

You're joking right? The only thing Microsoft "contributed", if you can call it that, was code to make the Linux kernel compatible with its proprietary virtualisation platform Hyper-V. And that's only because the enterprise demands it. It's completely useless for anything other than interfacing with Microsoft's proprietary hyper-visor.

So no, Microsoft has never contributed anything useful to the Linux kernel. You could strip out all the code they "contributed" and no one would be deficient, except Microsoft of course because it would lose virtualisation compatibility with Linux.

That top 20 contributor nonsense is just that. It's a meaningless PR expression to make people believe Microsoft is friendly towards free and open source software.

[simplezz]

While I do agree Microsoft doesn't hate open source or Linux

Really? You must have forgotten about when Steve Ballmer called Linux a cancer

it's just I think that Microsoft would rather have OEMs use computers with Windows.

You can thank secret NDA's for that.

[gohpep]

You're joking right? The only thing Microsoft "contributed", if you can call it that, was code to make the Linux kernel compatible with its proprietary virtualisation platform Hyper-V. And that's only because the enterprise demands it. It's completely useless for anything other than interfacing with Microsoft's proprietary hyper-visor.

So no, Microsoft has never contributed anything useful to the Linux kernel. You could strip out all the code they "contributed" and no one would be deficient, except Microsoft of course because it would lose virtualisation compatibility with Linux.

That top 20 contributor nonsense is just that. It's a meaningless PR expression to make people believe Microsoft is friendly towards free and open source software.

 

Really? You must have forgotten about when Steve Ballmer called Linux a cancer

He called it a cancer because of its license, which forced forks to be under the same license. A lot has changed since 2001.

Please don't forget about how Microsoft open sourced many Windows APIs last build conference. And that's not all, let's take a look at the list of open source Microsoft software:

http://www.microsoft.com/opensource/directory.aspx and https://github.com/MSOpenTech

In fact, Microsoft hosts their own open source software repository at http://www.codeplex.com/

 

I have no idea what I just read but if they expect to sell it I hope they find some better words as the memristor, silicon photonic computer just doesn't roll off the tongue.

 

Was the wording of my article summary bad, or was it too technical?

[Max Norris]

So no, Microsoft has never contributed anything useful to the Linux kernel. You could strip out all the code they "contributed" and no one would be deficient, except Microsoft of course because it would lose virtualisation compatibility with Linux.

It's useless... yet lots of enterprise setups use it. Uh-huh. You may not like it but apparently there was a demand big enough to warrant it. Real world says it's hardly useless, sorry.

That top 20 contributor nonsense is just that. It's a meaningless PR expression to make people believe Microsoft is friendly towards free and open source software.

And again.. uh-huh. Let's just ignore all the things they've actually released as open source under their own initiative.

Really? You must have forgotten about when Steve Ballmer called Linux a cancer

If you'd read that article you linked you'll see that he's taking issue with the very restrictive GPL, not Linux. Microsoft isn't the only ones that have issues with it either. Even from people in the *Nix camp.

[Osiris]

Was the wording of my article summary bad, or was it too technical?

 

Nah, I was just taking a light hearted dig at the long winded name of the thing :p