Re: How many times must Apple make such DRASTIC architecture changes?

[Shawn Hearn <srhi@comcast.net>]

In article <lVYpe.2151$751.1605@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com>,
 "Sean Fahey" <a2fan@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> The PPC wasn't going to go where Apple needed , fast enough. The Pentium 4
> is actually a pretty good processor, with better branching and latency then
> the PPC. Now they've got dual cores, hyper-threading - it was a good time to
> make the change. Get over it already.

I agree to a point. Don't forget that one thing that Apple apparently 
wants to do is migrate its entire line of Macs (both pro and consumer) 
to a 64-bit architecture, which would leave out the Pentium 4 chip and 
Celeron as likely CPUs to be built into Intel based Macs. If anything, 
Apple with go with an Itanium processor for its Macs and perhaps some 
lightweight version for laptops and iMacs. Even Steve Jobs said in 
his keynote that all the stuff he was demonstrating will never be sold 
as Mac products. The only thing that seems fairly clear is that the 
future Intel Macs will have an x86 architecture or some superset of it.