IBM shouldn't give Apple anything less than 3GHz if they are half as smart as they want to be perceived by those pondering weather, or not to do business with them.
IBM perceived as the new motorola?
heh. Don't think they're going to let that happen. Not afterall that posing on stage with Steve.
It won't look good if IBM are shipping IBM 'OS'/Sony Cell workstations to Sony to blast Apple in their own backyard. How long will Apple let that happen for?
ie IBM will have to keep a pretty compelling G5 going so Apple doesn't flick them faster than Moto'.
I'm surprised Apple didn't get in bed with the 'cell' project and offer their OS to be part of the deal. Sony and Apple teaming up in the workstation market. Could be a good deal for both. Apple get cell. Sony get 'x' cloned. A fair deal.
Apple could sell their own hardware.
As for next year?
The only way I feel the fx is going anywhere is part of a new chip.
Did we get a bump on the 970? No.
Despite the much muted 2.5 IBM press release...the 970 didn't scale that high.
So we got FX 970 instead at 2.5 gig tops. No 2.1/2/3 or 4 gig. We got 1.8, 2.0 and 2.5. An odd line up of cpu speeds. The 2.5 not seeming that much faster than the 2.0.
So, IBM release a 2.8? Would you notice the difference between that and 2.5? I doubt it.
FX 970 isn't going anywhere except as part of the/a new chip.
2.0, 2.5 and 3 gig dual core Antares or 2.5, 2.7 and 3.0 or a 3.2 gig.
(This gives a low end consumer chip of '4' gig and pro chips at '5' and '6' gig. Looking light years ahead of G4 and G5 FX problems. On the current bandwidth and higher? Lightspeed...)
IBM say they'll have their problems ironed out by 1st quarter 2005.
ie catch up with PowerMac and iMac demand. That gives them another couple of quarters to make a buck out of a poorly ramped G5 fx chip.
Despite all its promise of low power this and that...and mhz galore...the Fx has been cocked up by IBM big time. Blushings be spared that Intel are now shipping Prescott in wayyyyy more volume at high mhz and AMD have barely a whiff of problems. So...who really got to 0.09 first?
Doesn't matter if you can't ship it, eh? Automation sounds nice but if you're getting materials peeling off and whopping heat hot spots on yer chip? And you can barely ramp higher on .09 than you could on .13?
Rumours indicate Apple will have Antares by August. Er...that's now folks. They've got samples.
IBM begins ramp up in Jan' while giving Apple a decent quarter on the current G5s.
March. Apple announces Antares. Dual Core 970FX that blows anthing the wintel platform have out the water. It doesn't ship until WWDC. (If we have the same problems aka the 970 FX.)
Still ahead of Intel and AMD.
It would be really embarrassing if IBM, maker supreme of dual and quad core chips, cannot ship a dual core cpu to Apple.
Seems IBM are not used to delivery in volume? Well, they did with the G3 for 200K iBooks... It's pretty pathetic that they can't hack 400K G5s (Powermacs/iMacs...) Perhaps they should open up one or two more assembly lines and put their back into it...
Two years later will 2005 WWDC be. The G3 didn't last that long before the next 'big' thing G4 arrived. So Apple needs another big lift to stay in the game. To think people criticised Wizard when he said the 970 was a place holder graphic.
It's looking that way. The Antares chip will restore a significant and indisputable edge over the Wintel opposition. With 'Tiger'? At last we will have our revenge...
Lemon Bon Bon