On CHOW: 10 good cheap liquors
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 30 of 36:
Next »
« Previous
A couple of points
1. You are the only source I've seen stating that I2 has an x86 core built in; most have said one reason for slow market acceptance was that x86 was supported only through extremely slow software emulation. Can you cite a source? (I might look myself, but I'm not terribly interested in Itanic...)

2. I think it's interesting that Intel has *finally* seen Power as its main competitor at the very time IBM, Sony and Toshiba are gearing up to introduce the Cell processor. Predictably, this consortium has repeatedly described the Cell as "revolutionary" (aren't they all?).

*IF* Cell is *truly* revolutionary, then Intel are left well behind in technological terms and potential market size; Cell will supposedly work for everything from cellular telephones to supercomputing clusters. Intel can't match that flexibility.

MS will also becomes "has been" precisely because of their increasing dependence on Intel's x86 architecture over the years and their failure to really implement the "hardware abstraction layer" they touted so heavily at the introduction of NT...
Posted by: fmcgowan   Posted on: 03/09/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Intel's uncertain processor road-map (or the lack of a road...)  michael-t | 03/08/05
IBM has the advantage here  nucrash | 03/08/05
Intel's problem is  michael-t | 03/08/05
Just Talk  mabricen | 03/09/05
He he he ...  michael-t | 03/09/05
I think Intel would even disagree with your post.  bjbrock | 03/08/05
Very well put.  The King's Servant | 03/08/05
Intel overlooked  michael-t | 03/08/05
Itanium vs. Alpha, not x86  Filker0_z | 03/08/05
Opinion noted  Roger Ramjet | 03/09/05
Back to be Basics?  nucrash | 03/09/05
Cell out  Roger Ramjet | 03/09/05
Itanium Headed for Museum...  Neutrodyne | 03/08/05
I doubt it.  Roger Ramjet | 03/09/05
Wishful thinking on Intel's part  balsover | 03/08/05
Misconception  Roger Ramjet | 03/09/05
Definite shift in the party line  John L. Ries | 03/08/05
Itanium for "Big Iron"?  mwagner@... | 03/08/05
Always room  Roger Ramjet | 03/09/05
Topic of interest: Should we stick with x86?  CobraA1 | 03/09/05
Sticking  Roger Ramjet | 03/09/05
Why Not Emulation  nucrash | 03/09/05
No emulation  Roger Ramjet | 03/09/05
excuse me?  doh123 | 03/09/05
No, really - according to Intel  fmcgowan | 03/09/05
it has some hardware to help, yes, but  doh123 | 03/09/05
We are stuck with X86 for another 20 years  Prognosticator | 03/10/05
Wishful Thinking  kelkins@... | 03/09/05
Itanic WILL win in the end  Roger Ramjet | 03/09/05
A couple of points  fmcgowan | 03/09/05
Points taken  Roger Ramjet | 03/09/05
Good to hear back so soon...  fmcgowan | 03/09/05
True, as there is nothing to really encroach on is there?  PaddyOmaddy | 03/09/05
The wild cats in my backyard won't disturb the unicorns..  Xunil_Sierutuf | 03/09/05
Its about market acceptance...  GeiselS@... | 03/09/05
Wait for Itanium? IBM PowerPC G5 is ready right now.  billmichael | 03/13/05

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement