Intel claims Apple should have used Pentiums instead of 970!

in General Discussion edited January 2014
Check this out for a bit of a laugh from Intel themselves!


  • Reply 1 of 9
    cubedudecubedude Posts: 1,556member
    There was already a thread about this in GD.
  • Reply 2 of 9
    yevgenyyevgeny Posts: 1,148member
    ?At this point, in Apple?s three per cent of the market share, people say they can?t innovate when Apple controls the hardware or the software,? Gelsinger said. ?In our horizontal market, anybody at any layer can largely and independently perform independent innovation. Now when you add up those two models, at the end of the day, the horizontal one wins most of the time and that?s what we?ve committed ourselves and our industry to.?

    Oh yes, I can go off and write my own OS. Or my own compiler. Or my own drivers (yes, there is free open source software for these, but it is also present for the Mac). The only place for innovation that isn't owned by a large company is at the application level, just the same as Apple. Wintel is actually multiple stratified horizontal markets (x86, x86-64, IA-64) running on top of two operating systems (Windows, Linux). If you write an app for x86-64 on Linux, it doesn't run at any of the other supposedly horizontal levels. It is a total MYTH that you exist independent of the layers above or below you. The truth is that for the application developer is that the Wintel market is just as locked into horizontal monopolies as the Mac Market.

    I wonder what he considers to be innovation? How about coming out with USB products only to have them killed because Win98 doesn't support USB? Where is the innovation there? How about innovating a usable music service (a vertical task, not a horizontal task)? Apple has the ability to push through new innovation like no other company simply because it has a horizontal monopoly. Think back to the rate at which Apple was able to include 802.11 support. How about ditching the utterly useless floppy drive? These are things that can only be done quickly by having a vertical monopoly. This guy is trying to spread FUD and it is laughable.
  • Reply 3 of 9
    strobestrobe Posts: 369member
    What do you expect from a veep?

    The only thing I find surprising is that he would care about our tiny market share. I mean what is he afraid of? Gee, maybe that the world is going 64bit and Itanium sucks the big one, meanwhile PowerPC has been 64bit from the very beginning?

    Talk about small penis syndrome.
  • Reply 4 of 9
    hasapihasapi Posts: 290member
    Apologies to all, thread probably should be in GD. But importantly for future processor updates, see link below.,3959,1211744,00.asp

    What's important is that IBM seems VERY committed to delivering on its roadmap for the Power5, 980, Power6, 990, etc.

    But back to the Intel VP article, and to give some credit to Motorola, Apple with its G4 chip released PB's in Jan 01 were way ahead of Intel/PC laptops - they still suck!.

    Even now the P4 @ 3GHz would be a very hot chip that would most likely be too hot for the iMac form factor (leaving aside any OS discussions). Of course, Moto has now fallen behind the curve for now, but a 7457 @ 1.6GHz would appropriately arrest the situation until 90nm 970's.

    But would you expect anything else from an Intel VP about its processors, so then why even discuss Apple with its measly 3% market share?, sounds like these guys would find IBM as just about the only company on the planet with the research clout to bring real competitive products against Intel. Future looks very bright for Apple!
  • Reply 5 of 9
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    Yes, this belongs in GD, and I'm moving it there now.
  • Reply 6 of 9
    blablablabla Posts: 185member

    Originally posted by hasapi

    Check this out for a bit of a laugh from Intel themselves!

    The Intel VP answered a G5/mac/Steve Jobs question. You'll find the original interview here:

    "Q. Did Steve Jobs make the right chip decision, choosing IBM for his upcoming G5 processor, or will Apple be missing out on some pretty hot Intel technology.

    A. I think Steve Jobs has made the wrong CPU choice for 20 years, he just added a few more years to the life of his bad decisions. Steve's not an illogical guy, he's passionate and opinionated about the directions he wants is a poor path for the company as well as a poor path for the users.


    The digimatmag just throw a bunch of quotes together, makingit seems like the Intel VP is worried about competition from Apple or that he brought the subject up.
  • Reply 7 of 9
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    thanks for the links of the interview.

    This question was the one of the journalist, and the answer was an arrogant one. Nothing is good outside Intel. That's basically he said. If Wintel sucks it's because of Microsoft ...

    I don't know if the interview of this guy is a typical example of the Intel spirit, but it sucks.
  • Reply 8 of 9
    What is an Intel supposed to say publicly? That Jobs made the right decision, and that Intel doesn't make a product good enough for Apple? He wouldn't be a VP tomorrow if he said that.

    I believe Apple has chosen promising technologies, but most lack long-term consistency - a la the incredibly long life-span of the G4. Hopefully we can put that behind us...
  • Reply 9 of 9
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Of course they'd say this.


    What a crock!
Sign In or Register to comment.