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

[ZnU <znu@fake.invalid>]

In article <Cp1qe.26441$J12.21905@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>,
 Kelly Hall <khall@acm.org> wrote:

> Sean Fahey 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.
> 
> Apple doesn't want Pentium 4, although perhaps the dual core versions 
> will sell to a segment of their market.  What Apple wants is the Pentium 
> M for the notebooks.

I'm quite certain Apple also wants the later desktop chips that will be 
based on it. Processors that evolve from the current Pentium-M 
architecture are eventually going to take over Intel's entire lineup, or 
so say the roadmaps. Even the high-end Xeon's market segment will be 
filled by such chips by the end of 2007. Turns out Intel can design a 
pretty good chip when it's not buying into its own MHz myth (which it 
isn't with this architecture, unlike with the P4).

-- 
"This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply
ridiculous. And having said that, all options are on the table."
   -- George W. Bush in Brussels, Belgium, Feb. 22, 2005