On 8/24/05 2:48 PM, "~flipper" <lord.flipper at gmail.com> wrote: >>> Intel also has a history of broken promises, >> >> And IBM doesn't? > > Any citations on that? IBM didn't promise the 3 gig G5, Apple did. LOL And who promised Apple? IBM admitted to not being able to fulfill the "3G promise" and apologized for it. > IBM obviously sees protection of content copyright as a 'given', and has > supported it. But there's a huge difference between that, and using Palladium, > DRM, and the Trusted Computing chip, together, to, in effect allow any > company, at any time to switch the terms of a 'sale' into a 'rental'. And, except for the rumors, who said Apple *will* do such things in shipping MacIntel machines? > IBM lets their chief engineers, specifically David Safford, go 'off the > record' in opposing DRM, as envisioned by MS, on grounds of its being both > easily-defeatable, and that it 'takes away existing rights of the consumer". And Steve Jobs has said the same thing. That's why the DRM for the iTMS is so "loose". > It's the hardcooded, backed by a chipset, > 'bundling' that already appears on the motherboard of Apple's 'loaners', that > has some folks up in arms, or at least, alarmed. And, until we know for sure Apple plans to do this in shipping machines, the alarm is at the very least, premature. >>> Meanwhile Apple announces a platform abandonment, what (?), 18 months before >>> the 'rollout'? >> >> 12 at most. > > I'm on a Powerbook that is one year old, so I couldn't care less if the > set-top 'Mini' or the iMac has an incremental speed boost next year. So, > barring Apple going with the freescale, or buying into the dual-core IBM chip > (and the alti-vec support, etc)...it looks like a good 18 months. Wha...? Who has said that? Rumors and uninformed speculation has but no one at Apple has said which machines will be first out of the gate. -- Shawn King Host/Executive Producer Your Mac Life http://www.yourmaclife.com