IBM Reports That Microprocessor Production Having Some Problems Ramping Up?

Jump to First Reply
macsrgood4umacsrgood4u
Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
During the Apple Analyst conference call, one analyst said that IBM had reported at their meeting prior to Apple's about some problems in their microprocessor production. He asked Fred Anderson if this would affect the G5. The answer was that any new product takes time to ramp up and that he was not sure Apple would have enough G5 PowerMacs to fullfill orders when finally released next month.



Also, I suppose the "problems" may not have to do with the G5 at all but other processors?
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 46
    chu_bakkachu_bakka Posts: 1,793member
    Or he could just be saying that the demand is heavy and will be hard to meet. Especially at the start of production of a new product.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 2 of 46
    t'hain esh kelcht'hain esh kelch Posts: 1,274member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by chu_bakka

    Or he could just be saying that the demand is heavy and will be hard to meet. Especially at the start of production of a new product.



    Especially when the G5 is seen as the 'savior' of Apple.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 3 of 46
    kupan787kupan787 Posts: 586member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by MacsRGood4U

    During the Apple Analyst conference call, one analyst said that IBM had reported at their meeting prior to Apple's about some problems in their microprocessor production. He asked Fred Anderson if this would affect the G5. The answer was that any new product takes time to ramp up and that he was not sure Apple would have enough G5 PowerMacs to fullfill orders when finally released next month.



    This is on Macnn



    Quote:

    When asked if Apple would meet G5 demand, Anderson said that Apple has ?confidence in IBM?s manufacturing capabilities.?



    Sounds like conflicting info to me. Were you at the meeting, or are you reading this info from elsewhere?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 4 of 46
    henriokhenriok Posts: 537member
    Listnen to IBMs earnings call here. I cound't get it to work (RealOne nor WMP). Please report what IBM really said.



    http://www.ibm.com/investor/2q03/
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 5 of 46
    macsrgood4umacsrgood4u Posts: 3,007member
    I listened to the Apple broadcast. Fred Anderson was asked a question by an analyst who referred to an earlier conference call he had with IBM. He prefaced his question by saying IBM reported some trouble. Fred kinda ignored the essence of the question and just said what he did. If you listen to the QT replay you'll hear it.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 6 of 46
    macnn suxmacnn sux Posts: 36member
    they could be talking about G5s ready for the Xserve



    theere may be plenty for the PMs









    also, if there is a problem ? i'm sure they will try to solve it. go to the apple contact page and yell at them if you feel worried. apple probably doesn't look at appleInsider that often but some manager probably looks at the daily emails and reports to his superiors.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 7 of 46
    locutus27locutus27 Posts: 4member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Henriok

    Listnen to IBMs earnings call here. I cound't get it to work (RealOne nor WMP). Please report what IBM really said.



    http://www.ibm.com/investor/2q03/



    Henriok,



    I listened to both the IBM earnings call on my mac with real one player and Apple earnings call with quicktime player. The comments in the IBM call made a comment about 30nm process ramping more slowly and orders for chips being slower than expected currently.





    Locutus27
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 8 of 46
    mcqmcq Posts: 1,543member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Locutus27

    Henriok,



    I listened to both the IBM earnings call on my mac with real one player and Apple earnings call with quicktime player. The comments in the IBM call made a comment about 30nm process ramping more slowly and orders for chips being slower than expected currently.





    Locutus27



    30nm process or 130nm process? Assuming 130nm process, that would potentially mean the G5 right?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 9 of 46
    kecksykecksy Posts: 1,002member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by MCQ

    30nm process or 130nm process? Assuming 130nm process, that would potentially mean the G5 right?



    He must have meant 130nm because 30nm doesn't exist yet as far as I know. Maybe we'll be there by 2007.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 10 of 46
    mcqmcq Posts: 1,543member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kecksy

    He must have meant 130nm because 30nm doesn't exist yet as far as I know. Maybe we'll be there by 2007.



    That's what I thought... just making sure. Not really thinking right now, very tired.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 11 of 46
    dabrontdabront Posts: 3member
    Originally posted by Kecksy



    He must have meant 130nm because 30nm doesn't exist yet as far as I know. Maybe we'll be there by 2007



    I believe he said 300mm, perhaps referring to the 12" wafer that Jobs displayed during the Keynote. This was mentioned in relation to reasons why the Technology section had lost money. The inference was that this was in the past, and therefore would not have any effect on the recent G5 announcement.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 12 of 46
    telomartelomar Posts: 1,804member
    The statement made by IBM refers to the number of orders they are getting for their foundry business. Specifically it was stated as production isn't ramping up as expected I believe. Some no nothing analyst has then taken that to mean actual making of the chips as opposed to production capacity utilisation, which is what it referred to. There aren't any major problems with the PPC970's production.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 13 of 46
    elricelric Posts: 230member
    Apple changed shipping time on the dual 2ghz G5 from 'August' to '7-10 weeks' which would place the shipping times somewhere in September.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 14 of 46
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,500member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Elric

    Apple changed shipping time on the dual 2ghz G5 from 'August' to '7-10 weeks' which would place the shipping times somewhere in September.



    My first guess on that would be due to demand. Does it still say end of August for anybody with an order in?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 15 of 46
    macsrgood4umacsrgood4u Posts: 3,007member
    At the analyst meeting Apple said that the first production G5s go out to seeders, companies and testers. Also the first machines are shipped for display purposes to Apple Stores and other vendors. Then, they start fullfilling consumer orders. Get in line.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 16 of 46
    neumacneumac Posts: 93member
    The Apple Store now lists the 1.6 and 1.8 GHz G5s shipping in "4-6 weeks" and the dual 2.0 GHz shipping in "7-10 weeks."
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 17 of 46
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    I love to say it, Told ya so.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 18 of 46
    shetlineshetline Posts: 4,695member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by neumac

    The Apple Store now lists the 1.6 and 1.8 GHz G5s shipping in "4-6 weeks" and the dual 2.0 GHz shipping in "7-10 weeks."



    Where on Apple's web site do people find these shipping times that are always being talked about? Do you have to pretend you're placing an order to get this info?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 19 of 46
    anonymous karmaanonymous karma Posts: 174member
    One, what does this have to do with future hardware (at least non-tangentially)?



    Second, looking at shipping times for orders placed now is probably not the best way to gauge when the first batch of orders will be shipped. It may just be Apple playing CYA with all new orders.



    Lastly, I'm sure they would not have announced the G5 if production of the processor weren't already gearing up. There's no way to announce at the end of June and get product assembled and to customers by the end of August otherwise. Thus I'm fairly confident that Apple will hit its original stated time +/- epsilon (hopefully -).
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 20 of 46
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    I love to say it, Told ya so.



    Read Telomar's post, he has the correct context. IBM was talking about the orders for production, not the production process itself.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.