Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Not with OSX restricted to expensive Apple hardware. And by next year, they'll be lucky to have 50% of the marketshare they have today.
have a large stake in making it a great success
Have you looked at Apple market share lately?
Hey paul, how do you feel about the various stories out today that all have IPF circling the drain?
3 makes sense from a yield/ power/speed binsplit point of view. If you can disable 1 core, you get a lot more parts. Will they need to, or not? Who knows.
What is good is that they have the ability to do it.
I'm not sure why Keith doesn't seem to see the point of it, and thinks it is just a joke.
Hitachi Montecito chipset circling the drain.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23750
Intel quad-core kludge not until 2007. (2 x Woodcrest, choked by the FSB)
IPF circling the drain.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23748
Quad-core Opteron in Q1 2006.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23747
[...]
Well, it is real, there is a 4-core beastie coming with the F-Step CPUs in Q1. Yes, I said Q1.
[...]
He means, roadmap compared to IBM PPC.
LOL! Of course he isn't. IPF being slowly put to sleep is a GOOD thing, don't you see? In fact, IPF is so good, it never needs to move beyond 90nm, see?
Um, no. :) Not compared to Apple mac software revenues (OS, apps, etc.)
Intel neuters Montvale, the IPF successor to Montecito.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23725
Looks like they are winding down the IPF boondoggle.
A choice quote:
INTEL CASTRATED MONTVALE a couple of weeks ago. The chip was supposed to be the 65 nanometre shrink of Montecito, the great white hope for Itanium's future, with enough tweaks to make it a solid upgrade. Instead of that, the plug on the project was basically pulled, and it will be a 90 nanometre chip with the most minor of upgrades, a little more cache, and some other enhancements.
Not if the rumor is correct...
No, if apple did that, they would kill their hardware sales. And it would be a driver nightmare for them to support third aprty stuff. They won't, I'll predict.
One thing apple should've done is make the switch all at once. That is, if it won't be until 2007 for the powermac, leave the mac mini until then, too, and buy yourself another year of stealth internal development (and don't kill your ppc sales for a year).
You need supporting arguments for the very history of IPF?
Typical paul: attack the poster instead of the argument.
I said: if it were NOT true, there's really nothing wrong with Intel or IBM saying so. Good luck to Apple winning a lawsuit over that one.
But graphics drivers (and game performance) are a big issue.
I'm not saying they would do it on purpose. Look at the state of PPC graphics drivers for their hardware right now.
it could be obsolete a decade before shipping.
Sounds like IPF!
I doubt that all applications/drivers would be released for the PPC-stuff in a timely manner (or at all) once the x86 systems were available.
Or with Mac Minis, obsolete in 1 year. Maybe it is all a cover for some other announcement, but in that case you'd expect more than a no-comment from IBM and Intel.
Truly bizarre that they would announce such plans 1 to 2 *years* in advance of the change-over. One would think this would tend to depress all PPC-based hardware sales over the next couple years.
I'm surprised you couldn't find any Linux distributions at Fry's. Perhaps you should ask for help from a Fry's worker next time. They come with tons of applications.
It's a great sales pitch Intel has lined up for Yonah:
Buy a laptop in early 2006 that won't run Longhorn 64-bit later that year. Oh, and don't wait for our hurried-up 64-bit mobile parts coming in late 2006. You can junk your laptop and buy another at that time.
Brilliant.
Monarch has had the X2 line listed for a couple days now.
Shipments start the 16th.
http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=M&Category_Code=...
LOL. Between this and your IPF boosterism, you could get a job as an Intel PR rep, Paul.
In case anyone missed it: Yonah delayed.
It seems claims of shipments in Q4 or even Q3 have evaporated. Intel now says Yonah will be ready in the "first part of 2006".
http://news.com.com/Intel+spills+beans+on+Yonah%2C+the+next+notebook+chip/2100-1006_3-5729925.html?t...
You also have to love the line about deliberately choosing to leave out iAMD64 capability because of power considerations! LOL. I guess the truth (we were too far along in the design when we realized AMD64 was the next mainstream ISA) wouldn't sound as good.
LOL! Listen to that Intel guy spin...
"We made a conscious decision not to include it" because of the impact on battery life, Eden said.
Yeah, right.
a notebook chip coming from Intel in the first part of next year,
Looks like Yonah slipped.
"I believe we were designing it before anyone knew how to spell dual core," he said.
Another Intel lie.
No, they aren't. He said it was socket 754.
Same socket, it is probably a matter of BIOS support for the Turion, to ensure proper voltages, etc.
I'll have to defer to your expertise in that area.
http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/product_detail.do?storeName=computer_store&landing=co...
http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/generic_subcategory.do?storeName=computer_store&landi...
Announced, for sale later this month:
http://news.com.com/HP+debuts+new+Livestrong+laptop/2100-1044_3-5715191.html?part=rss&tag=571519...
The HP Special Edition L2000 Notebook will sport the Livestrong logo, along with a copy of Armstrong's autograph on the keyboard, the companies said. The 64-bit notebook, expected to be available in June, is powered by AMD's Turion 64 and features enhanced battery life.
http://www.pcmag.com/slideshow/0,2394,l=&s=25696&a=152315,00.asp
I'm glad you realized your error.
HP has already announced 1 Turion system.
Nice try, wbmw. Yes, Napa was promised for 2006, but Intel had been making noises (lies, really) about shipping Yonah (not Napa) as early as Q3. Does this mean they won't even ship Yonah for revenue in Q4?
Thanks, that was my thinking, too.
Tenchu, I guess you don't comprehend the two possibilities:
1) CPU-Z is just interpreting a voltage "code".
2) CPU-Z is asking the BIOS for the current voltage in absolute terms.
If the answer is 2, the CPU name could be wrong, but the voltage could be correct.
If the answer were 1, CPU-Z would not reflect over-volted situations that overclockers often use, yet we see this all the time in screenshots of CPU-Z... making this one unlikely.
Does that help you?
Tenchu, that doesn't mean the reported voltage is wrong.
I have rarely seen it be off by more than .1v
CPU-Z voltage readings are very often accurate, even when the CPU name is stale.
LOL, a 65 nm chip running at 1.575 Volts?
I know, pretty bad, eh? Perhaps the part is seriously o/c'd.
Then again, Dempsey is rumored to have a 150W TDP.
Dempsey sample running at 1.575v ? That doesn't bode well for Intel's 65nm TDPs.
See the CPU-Z shot:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23643