Even if it does rock, people may look at your rather vague claims and label you a poser
Seriously, repeated claims like that without substantiation, while they may keep an optimist happy, start to sound bogus after a while.
Not that I *want* them to be bogus, I just want more dirt
I know they may sound bogus, but trust me they are not! I must reiterate, wait and see what is coming... I don't think many will be angry at what is coming! Closer to WWDC I might post what I know...
I know they may sound bogus, but trust me they are not! I must reiterate, wait and see what is coming... I don't think many will be angry at what is coming! Closer to WWDC I might post what I know...
That's a troll post if I've ever seen one. Can you corroborate any information I provided in my earlier posts? A yes or no answer will suffice unless you choose to elaborate.
That's a troll post if I've ever seen one. Can you corroborate any information I provided in my earlier posts? A yes or no answer will suffice unless you choose to elaborate.
I do not post unless I either know something or have an opinion.
Totally off topic, but I thought this was the case when they first used KFC
Quote:
Originally posted by gsfmark
i thought kentucky fried chicken changed its name to KFC to disassociate itself with the word fried, as it has negative connotations... that's what i heard anyway.
It was also a trendy thing to keep the brand name popular. Kentucky Fried Chicken seemed to be going into the void for years. Short, and to the point branding "KFC" (similar to the Macintosh, iMac, and the whole iConversion), was exactly what the company needed to make resurgence in the marketplace.
That would make a lot of sense, at least from my point of view. IBM want's to establish a new "standard" in CPU architect, that was one of the original AIM goals in the first place. The problem has been, and remains, is that Apple is the only large scale manufacturer of PowerPC based desktop computers. If IBM looks at their commitment to Apple as a PR campaign for their platform then IBM would make money as other manufacturers moved to the PowerPC platform for their Unix boxes, and with the proper evolution of the PowerPC chips the re-emergence of WinNT for the PowerPC architecture. The biggest problem that I see with splitting the market up this way is that for IBM to succeed they have to expand their market, which means selling the chips and a motherboard "reference" design to companies that will compete with Apple, which would not be in Apple's best interest.
I'll believe it when I see it, but it's a strong move if they have the processors, and I hope they do. It would be a great idea if they can provide the processors.
Why? Because Apple has been stating they are the biggest selling, and largest scale UNIX OS, and system manufacturer in the world for a while. (or something along those lines), and IBM seems to want to own the Linux box/Linux Server market. If IBM, and Apple can group their efforts they would have serious long term stability, and in the short term each would see considerable growth in areas they have been looking to for growth.
The growing 'NIX world would be theirs.
It's a brilliant strategy, but two questions remain: Does IBM have the processors to make a resurgence possible being that they have to prove that they can do for their largest, long term, well known, customers (Apple) what they do for themselves?
Also #2) How important is it to IBM that they can provide such a service to their customers? (Apple)
They (IBM) probably already have enough power to deliver an outstanding LInux supplement, and if that's all they really are looking for in the future they probably already have it. So their work is done.
What? Why? Look at what MS did with IBM. They BS'd their way into the largest PC makers headquarters, and sold IBM something that they did not have. An imaginary OS based only on the fact that they knew a guy that knew a guy that supposedly wrote an OS. "DOS".
IBM may have just bluffed their way in to MS to get their revenge.
How? They just sold MS XBOX2 processors, and that they have no real idea if they are going to live up their promise.
They may have also took SONY for a ride just to convince MS that they had something. (raking in billions along the way)
They just sold the entire gaming console market (Multi Billion Dollar a year industry) processors that don't yet exist.
Now that's an interesting theory. Isn't it?
------------------
Now back to we all trust each other.
I am of the opinion that IBM is going to own the industry that IBM, and Apple started many moons ago. Although, many moons ago they (Apple, and IBM) were of different views - now they have a united cause., but IBM is the backbone, and foundation of this movement being that without them, there is no PPC processor industry. But, they also have to gain serious face by getting processors to Apple which in essence makes Apple the backbone of their possible onslaught, resurgence, and reemergence to being the true "Big Blue".
Basically IBM has a fallback option that is hardly as financially lucrative as the other - which would be that IBM oWnZ the Linux market, and has a stake in the Gaming Console market, but delivered sub-par processors in a time of need. But IBM has a chance at the whole enchilada if they can pull it off which would leave them in a position to become the richest company on earth.
If IBM pulls it off expect to see the US economy sky rocket back to where it was 10 years ago, in about 2 to 4 years.
I based my statement on the assumption that IBM processor devision wants to expand their sales of PowerPC processors. I make that assumption on their past attempts with the CHRP mother board designs and their new program touting custom designed PowerPC chips. To do this Apple is not a big enough customer, yet to get the ball rolling they need lower cost PowerPC computer out there to help build a large enough "home grown" developer base for Linux on PowerPC, as well as a respect for the merits of the PowerPC platform. This will attract other hardware developers to come adopt the IBM PowerPC reference platform for new hardware that is not Apple's which would compete against Wintel and other AMD/Intel Linux computers, and yes against Apple.
Now I am assuming, and you know what they say about assumptions, so I may not be correct. Even if I am it does not mean that they will succeed. It could be that IBM does not want to open their partnership in the desktop/server arena for PowerPC processors beyond Apple, this keeping a tighter reign on the hardware and not letting the market get away from them again. That does make sense from the IBM server/computer devision. They may be able to grow enough of a market to sustain development with this strategy. Again I think that it would only help them in this endeavor to supply Apple with the lowest cost PowerPC chips at the highest level of performance that they can because this is a consumer face for the PowerPC platform and makes their own systems more marketable when selling them to "non-geeks" that may be approving the actual computer purchases.
I would hope Apple would spread out the new architecture a little more - maybe push one down into lower high end.
more like 2 'old' architecture models
and 2 'new' architecture models.
That is, unless they go Hardcore and revamp the entire line to PCIe
I expect them to pull a Yikes! The low end tower will be a single 2.0 970 (not fx) on the current mobo. This will in fact be an upgrade beyond mere clockspeed as the new entry level single proc machine will have the PCI-X slots and 8GB RAM capacity the current 1.6 model lacks.
The mid and high end machines will be dual 975s at 2.5 and 3.0GHz with PCIe graphics. These will be advertised as shipping in July and August respectively but will of course slip at least a month each in practice.
Price points will remain the same making the low end single 2.0 not quite as big a rip off as before, while the duals will only increase their existing value propositions.
Sure I do. It all depends on what can and cannot be released.
Let me restate my direct question: "Can you corroborate any information I provided in my earlier posts." This can be answered with a simple yes or no without compromising any confidentiality or source. Or does it also depend on what the definition of "is" is?
tman, you're new around here so let me help you out: don't feed the trolls.
tfworld is some 14 year old Windows user who thinks it's funny to pull our chain. As the only person to offer details on inside info in this thread, you have even more reason to just ignore him.
tman, you're new around here so let me help you out: don't feed the trolls.
tfworld is some 14 year old Windows user who thinks it's funny to pull our chain. As the only person to offer details on inside info in this thread, you have even more reason to just ignore him.
Well you got part of it right. I have been programming on windows computers for over 14 years and Macs for about 4 years now. Sorry, not a troll.
Let me restate my direct question: "Can you corroborate any information I provided in my earlier posts." This can be answered with a simple yes or no without compromising any confidentiality or source. Or does it also depend on what the definition of "is" is?
Ok I re-read what you wrote earlier. After 10 pages it slipped my mind... What is "is"? yes
tman, you're new around here so let me help you out: don't feed the trolls.
tfworld is some 14 year old Windows user who thinks it's funny to pull our chain. As the only person to offer details on inside info in this thread, you have even more reason to just ignore him.
Well, I've been hanging around here just shy of 2 years so I'm not exactly new, but your point is well taken. I'll wright him off untill he can establish some credibility.I'm sure you understand how gratifying it would be to have some "credible" substantiation of what I was told.
No, cubist is right. The state of Kentucky charges royalties for the use of the name Kentucky. Even the Kentucky Derby changed their name, and Kentucky Bluegrass is now called Shenandoah Bluegrass or something. Neil Diamond pulled a song off the air because his royalty payments to Kentucky would be more than he made from the air play.
Sorry for the derail, but for those on the KFC thread...... It is bigger than the royalty issue. It never really bothered them before.
KFC actually changed the name as a multi year campaign to get rid of the word "fried" from being associated with their food, not Kentucky. As you will notice, the latest phase of the plan used in their commercials uses the words "Kitchen Fresh Chicken" to describe their product. It is huge rollout starting several years ago and still in progress.
I can't say any more, but KFC is about to go to 4 biscuits per bucket, instead of the traditional two. The bucket design will also change, but the biggest changes will be inside. I'm hearing we might be able to upgrade our side dishes, and, yes, here come hot-swappable mashed potatoes!
Just because someone claims to know something you dont everyone bashes him in? No wonder everyone that has known anything has been run off... I have been here for 6 years, from before the great "purge" in 98 or 99 and will continue to read AI for as long as they are around. Whether I will post anything any more, who knows. Maybe I will just to upset people or maybe I will to increase my credibility. BTW, tman, I have been around for 3 times as long as you, so maybe that increases my credibility over yours? However, never before has the future been so blatantly visible for the Mac. Many people have posted almost the exact specs of what will be out. Need I make a list? I dont think so... until later
Comments
Originally posted by dfryer
Even if it does rock, people may look at your rather vague claims and label you a poser
Seriously, repeated claims like that without substantiation, while they may keep an optimist happy, start to sound bogus after a while.
Not that I *want* them to be bogus, I just want more dirt
I know they may sound bogus, but trust me they are not!
Originally posted by tfworld
I know they may sound bogus, but trust me they are not!
That's a troll post if I've ever seen one. Can you corroborate any information I provided in my earlier posts? A yes or no answer will suffice unless you choose to elaborate.
Originally posted by tman
That's a troll post if I've ever seen one. Can you corroborate any information I provided in my earlier posts? A yes or no answer will suffice unless you choose to elaborate.
I do not post unless I either know something or have an opinion.
Frankly i'm not too worried. If AMD has the Athlon at 2.4Ghz on a 130nm process then Apple should be able to hit 2.6 easily with the 970fx.
Folks this is a done deal. Common sense points toward the 970FX taking us to 2.6Ghz while the 975 brings us up at 3Ghz.
Single 2Ghz- 1799
Dual 2.22Ghz - 2399
Dual 2.6Ghz -2999
Dual 3Ghz -3499 (PCI express. Major architectural change)
Originally posted by gsfmark
i thought kentucky fried chicken changed its name to KFC to disassociate itself with the word fried, as it has negative connotations... that's what i heard anyway.
It was also a trendy thing to keep the brand name popular. Kentucky Fried Chicken seemed to be going into the void for years. Short, and to the point branding "KFC" (similar to the Macintosh, iMac, and the whole iConversion), was exactly what the company needed to make resurgence in the marketplace.
I am the daddy of the Mac.... Da-De.
Originally posted by @homenow
That would make a lot of sense, at least from my point of view. IBM want's to establish a new "standard" in CPU architect, that was one of the original AIM goals in the first place. The problem has been, and remains, is that Apple is the only large scale manufacturer of PowerPC based desktop computers. If IBM looks at their commitment to Apple as a PR campaign for their platform then IBM would make money as other manufacturers moved to the PowerPC platform for their Unix boxes, and with the proper evolution of the PowerPC chips the re-emergence of WinNT for the PowerPC architecture. The biggest problem that I see with splitting the market up this way is that for IBM to succeed they have to expand their market, which means selling the chips and a motherboard "reference" design to companies that will compete with Apple, which would not be in Apple's best interest.
I'll believe it when I see it, but it's a strong move if they have the processors, and I hope they do. It would be a great idea if they can provide the processors.
Why? Because Apple has been stating they are the biggest selling, and largest scale UNIX OS, and system manufacturer in the world for a while. (or something along those lines), and IBM seems to want to own the Linux box/Linux Server market. If IBM, and Apple can group their efforts they would have serious long term stability, and in the short term each would see considerable growth in areas they have been looking to for growth.
The growing 'NIX world would be theirs.
It's a brilliant strategy, but two questions remain: Does IBM have the processors to make a resurgence possible being that they have to prove that they can do for their largest, long term, well known, customers (Apple) what they do for themselves?
Also #2) How important is it to IBM that they can provide such a service to their customers? (Apple)
They (IBM) probably already have enough power to deliver an outstanding LInux supplement, and if that's all they really are looking for in the future they probably already have it. So their work is done.
What? Why? Look at what MS did with IBM. They BS'd their way into the largest PC makers headquarters, and sold IBM something that they did not have. An imaginary OS based only on the fact that they knew a guy that knew a guy that supposedly wrote an OS. "DOS".
IBM may have just bluffed their way in to MS to get their revenge.
How? They just sold MS XBOX2 processors, and that they have no real idea if they are going to live up their promise.
They may have also took SONY for a ride just to convince MS that they had something. (raking in billions along the way)
They just sold the entire gaming console market (Multi Billion Dollar a year industry) processors that don't yet exist.
Now that's an interesting theory. Isn't it?
------------------
Now back to we all trust each other.
I am of the opinion that IBM is going to own the industry that IBM, and Apple started many moons ago. Although, many moons ago they (Apple, and IBM) were of different views - now they have a united cause., but IBM is the backbone, and foundation of this movement being that without them, there is no PPC processor industry. But, they also have to gain serious face by getting processors to Apple which in essence makes Apple the backbone of their possible onslaught, resurgence, and reemergence to being the true "Big Blue".
Basically IBM has a fallback option that is hardly as financially lucrative as the other - which would be that IBM oWnZ the Linux market, and has a stake in the Gaming Console market, but delivered sub-par processors in a time of need. But IBM has a chance at the whole enchilada if they can pull it off which would leave them in a position to become the richest company on earth.
If IBM pulls it off expect to see the US economy sky rocket back to where it was 10 years ago, in about 2 to 4 years.
My 2¢²
Originally posted by tfworld
I do not post unless I either know something or have an opinion.
You also do not respond to a direct question with a direct answer.
Originally posted by tman
You also do not respond to a direct question with a direct answer.
Sure I do. It all depends on what can and cannot be released.
I based my statement on the assumption that IBM processor devision wants to expand their sales of PowerPC processors. I make that assumption on their past attempts with the CHRP mother board designs and their new program touting custom designed PowerPC chips. To do this Apple is not a big enough customer, yet to get the ball rolling they need lower cost PowerPC computer out there to help build a large enough "home grown" developer base for Linux on PowerPC, as well as a respect for the merits of the PowerPC platform. This will attract other hardware developers to come adopt the IBM PowerPC reference platform for new hardware that is not Apple's which would compete against Wintel and other AMD/Intel Linux computers, and yes against Apple.
Now I am assuming, and you know what they say about assumptions, so I may not be correct. Even if I am it does not mean that they will succeed. It could be that IBM does not want to open their partnership in the desktop/server arena for PowerPC processors beyond Apple, this keeping a tighter reign on the hardware and not letting the market get away from them again. That does make sense from the IBM server/computer devision. They may be able to grow enough of a market to sustain development with this strategy. Again I think that it would only help them in this endeavor to supply Apple with the lowest cost PowerPC chips at the highest level of performance that they can because this is a consumer face for the PowerPC platform and makes their own systems more marketable when selling them to "non-geeks" that may be approving the actual computer purchases.
more like 2 'old' architecture models
and 2 'new' architecture models.
Also of interest -
http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml...toryID=5308639
new ATi PCIe cards . . .
That is, unless they go Hardcore and revamp the entire line to PCIe
Originally posted by cinder
I would hope Apple would spread out the new architecture a little more - maybe push one down into lower high end.
more like 2 'old' architecture models
and 2 'new' architecture models.
That is, unless they go Hardcore and revamp the entire line to PCIe
I expect them to pull a Yikes! The low end tower will be a single 2.0 970 (not fx) on the current mobo. This will in fact be an upgrade beyond mere clockspeed as the new entry level single proc machine will have the PCI-X slots and 8GB RAM capacity the current 1.6 model lacks.
The mid and high end machines will be dual 975s at 2.5 and 3.0GHz with PCIe graphics. These will be advertised as shipping in July and August respectively but will of course slip at least a month each in practice.
Price points will remain the same making the low end single 2.0 not quite as big a rip off as before, while the duals will only increase their existing value propositions.
Originally posted by tfworld
Sure I do. It all depends on what can and cannot be released.
Let me restate my direct question: "Can you corroborate any information I provided in my earlier posts." This can be answered with a simple yes or no without compromising any confidentiality or source. Or does it also depend on what the definition of "is" is?
tfworld is some 14 year old Windows user who thinks it's funny to pull our chain. As the only person to offer details on inside info in this thread, you have even more reason to just ignore him.
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
tman, you're new around here so let me help you out: don't feed the trolls.
tfworld is some 14 year old Windows user who thinks it's funny to pull our chain. As the only person to offer details on inside info in this thread, you have even more reason to just ignore him.
Well you got part of it right. I have been programming on windows computers for over 14 years and Macs for about 4 years now.
Originally posted by tman
Let me restate my direct question: "Can you corroborate any information I provided in my earlier posts." This can be answered with a simple yes or no without compromising any confidentiality or source. Or does it also depend on what the definition of "is" is?
Ok I re-read what you wrote earlier. After 10 pages it slipped my mind... What is "is"? yes
Originally posted by tfworld
Well you got part of it right. I have been programming on windows computers for over 14 years and Macs for about 4 years now.
At the ripe age of 9....
Anyway, since the build was dated May 12th, and the ADC site still does not have any source available, I am guessing the reason is a new platform.
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
tman, you're new around here so let me help you out: don't feed the trolls.
tfworld is some 14 year old Windows user who thinks it's funny to pull our chain. As the only person to offer details on inside info in this thread, you have even more reason to just ignore him.
Well, I've been hanging around here just shy of 2 years so I'm not exactly new, but your point is well taken. I'll wright him off untill he can establish some credibility.I'm sure you understand how gratifying it would be to have some "credible" substantiation of what I was told.
Originally posted by spankalee
No, cubist is right. The state of Kentucky charges royalties for the use of the name Kentucky. Even the Kentucky Derby changed their name, and Kentucky Bluegrass is now called Shenandoah Bluegrass or something. Neil Diamond pulled a song off the air because his royalty payments to Kentucky would be more than he made from the air play.
Sorry for the derail, but for those on the KFC thread...... It is bigger than the royalty issue. It never really bothered them before.
KFC actually changed the name as a multi year campaign to get rid of the word "fried" from being associated with their food, not Kentucky. As you will notice, the latest phase of the plan used in their commercials uses the words "Kitchen Fresh Chicken" to describe their product. It is huge rollout starting several years ago and still in progress.
Originally posted by tfworld
The new IBM processor will rock.
tfworld...Will they also rock in PowerBooks and iMacs at the WWDC?
Want lies with that?