[Ti] Intel shows off 64-bit dual core processors for mobile, desktop, and servers

~flipper lord.flipper at gmail.com
Wed Aug 24 11:26:58 PDT 2005

T.L. Miller wrote:

> >Well, it appears that Intel will roll out their chips one year from 
>>now at the earliest. By then IBM will have an enormous advantage.
>>Let's face it, Intel is probably a couple of years behind IBM which 
>>is huge with the advance of technology at the pace it is right now.
>Maybe you have seen the roadmaps from both companies so you know what's
>happening in years to come, but most of us haven't been given that

It's true, nobody knows, with any certainty, what will happen in the next couple of years. But a look at the road already traveled shows Intel lagging IBM in architecture, and AMD, in evolution of the Intel architecture.

Intel also has a history of broken promises, and is in league with a company that exemplifies the opposite of user 'ownership' and 'control' of boxes and software. IBM has been adamant about their opposition to DRM in a highly-critical white paper (on grounds of privacy, security, and fair use, they are hardly advocates of 'piracy', of course).

Meanwhile Apple announces a platform abandonment, what (?), 18 months before the 'rollout'? That's not good business. And the simultaneous announcement that they are banking on 'promises' and tossing in with the advocates of reduced fair use, lack of true 'ownership', etc... I don't know what exactly will unfold, but it shouldn't be hard to understand the skepticism, should it? I just hope that the folks with the darker scenarios in mind, are wrong, that's all.

Apple users haven't had problems, on anything like a scale that could possibly justify a move to Microsoft's (and their buddies, Intel) trusted-computing Palladium (whatever it keeps changing its name to) system. So why the move? Second-rate 64-bit architecture? Mirage-like notions of a marginally cheaper box? Who knows?

Fingers crossed,
Brian S

More information about the Titanium mailing list