or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by THT

The question is for 2006, 2007 and 2008, not necessarily today. Moore's Law essentially states that the number of transistors in semiconductor parts, microprocessors, doubles every 2 years. This is done by developing production facilities capable of producing smaller transistors every 2 years. This statement needs a 10000+ page book to explain because it involves virtually everything in the universe! I exaggerate, but it involves a lot of economics and physics. The reason...
Jobs' worst business decisions? In no specific order: o Not producing "Macintosh" on top of Apple II and MS-DOS o Hiring Jon Sculley o Positioning NeXT hardware in college level education market (should have been consumer and content creation) o Not transitioning NeXT 68k hardware to NeXT x86 hardware instead they made NEXTSTEP for Intel processors o Not realizing the power of WorldWideWeb.app and not creating NEXTSTEP based web servers The PowerPC -> Intel...
Dual-core Powerbook baby. My 500 MHz iBook, 256 MB RAM, is long past retirement, but it will need to last another year. I probably should get that 512 MB SO-DIMM soon. It couldn't even view the WWDC webcast. Poor geezer.
I wouldn't sweat the trust thing. In 3 years, there will be only 2 corporations in the world that will be able to produce 45 nm desktop chips. One of them will be Intel. The other one, I don't know, perhaps UMD+TSMC or Japanese/Korean conglomerate or IBM/AMD/Philips conglomerate. I'll bet that Intel will get their first, a year before the other companies will. IBM will be perfectly happy producing a 65 nm 3.2 GHz Cell and Xenon well into 2008, barely bothering to improve...
AMD shares fabrication technology with IBM. If it weren't for AMD's technology sharing deals with IBM, AMD wouldn't be where it is at today. If Apple wasn't confident about IBM's fabrication technology, and IBM's 90 nm performance is ample proof that they weren't doing that great, then they wouldn't be confident in AMD's fab tech either.
The future of operating system software is up for grabs because the Internet has made rich client applications niche products (along with Office applications becoming commodity products or superseded by web apps). I'll say it a different way. Developers won't be locked into Microsoft APIs (MSFC, .Net) because nearly all of the developers will be developing Internet applications, which for the most part only needs a browser. And Microsoft already knows they already...
A G5 and an Athlon 64 are for the most part equal clock to clock. IE, a 2.5 GHz 970fx = 2.5 GHz Athlon 64. Of all the computers you chose to compare, the dual 2.7 GHz is the most competitive price/performance wise. It's about at parity short of unique things like SLI. Game performance goes w/o saying. Content creation they are about equal. The low end and laptops, however, are embarrassing.
Intel was the right decision. It's very simple. Ask yourself the following questions: Which company will ship a 65 nm CPU first? Which company will ship a 45 nm CPU first? The answer is Intel. They were the first to 130 nm, the first to 90 nm, and maybe even the first to 180 nm, but I don't quite remember that one.
Was Jobs quoting growth rates or market share? If it was market share, I don't think I will believe him until independently verified.
I'm still hoping for a Powerbook G5. But the reality seems to be a 1.8 GHz 7448 Powerbook G4 in August or so. Whence that happens, iBooks can be upgraded to 1.5 GHz G4s. These are essentially cheap, near zero cost bin swaps. I'm still expecting a 970mp PowerMac G5 as well where the 970mp is a drop in replacement for the 970fx board. 50/50 on the possibility of PCIe making it onto the board though.
New Posts  All Forums: