PDA

View Full Version : "I think Steve Jobs has made the wrong CPU choice for 20 ye...


MacBytes
Aug 5, 2003, 02:47 AM
Category: Opinion and Speculation
Link: "I think Steve Jobs has made the wrong CPU choice for 20 years, he just added a few more years to the life of his bad decisions." according to Intel's Senior VP and Chief Technology Officer. (http://www.canada.com/technology/story.html?id=262551E7-13C4-47D2-8782-E933BC367BF6)

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)

arn
Aug 5, 2003, 03:17 AM
ah... Intel... talking smack. :)

arn

Porshuh944turbo
Aug 5, 2003, 03:26 AM
hehe.. this is only a good sign..

Intel is silent until fear sets in...:eek:


:beer:

matthew24
Aug 5, 2003, 05:23 AM
Somebody should tell this guy; "You have been working for the wrong company for 20 years.". After 20 years the i86 architecture is still a shame in the industry.

tazo
Aug 5, 2003, 05:24 AM
that was actually a very interesting article and in some ways I agree with him on steve jobs "he is passionate and that affects the company..."

Mr. Anderson
Aug 5, 2003, 06:32 AM
Strong words from Intel....interesting.

But I think the path that Apple's taken has set itself apart from the rest, taking their own marketing advice, Thinking Different, and succeeding. True, they're had issues with Motorola, but as we've seen with the move to IBM chips, Apple can change.

Loved the quote 'Do I get frustrated sometimes that Microsoft isn't doing the right thing in the operating system'

Also his vision of the future is pretty nice - if we end up with technology like that it would be great. But his talk of innovation seemed to be a little defensive. Apple innovates and changes the industry, leads it in many ways.

D

Ambrose Chapel
Aug 5, 2003, 07:48 AM
Q. Do you have a personal goal? A. To reach the entirety of humanity, every human on earth with our technology.

Ahh...the noble goal of world domination. I, too, hope to be a wintel serf one day.

Jerry Spoon
Aug 5, 2003, 08:48 AM
We have to make technology more transparent and visible

Is it just me, or do these two things not really fit together?


If technology can do it we will embrace it, even if it means eating our own children.

Oh My God!!! Somebody go check if this guy has any kids!!!:eek:

Sun Baked
Aug 5, 2003, 09:37 AM
MS stunted the PowerPC Platform when they killed off Windows for PPC.

Now that there is life beyond Apple in the PowerPC Platform with the coming Linux 970PPCs and the revival of IBMs PPC Workstations, the health of the platform and it's base is growing.

Sort of at the cusp of change for the platform. This time MS attitude is forcing people away from Windows to Linux, as the movement picks up steam -- the Linux PPC may be a viable alternative.

Of course it'll be interesting to see which path the "Other OS" decides to take after their 4.0 PPC release. With MS working quite a bit with Amiga lately, and their talk of easy portability of OS4.0 -- the choice between Intel/PPC970 may be hard for them. Though they are using mildly modified Linux PPCs as their hardware platform for OS4.0 in pre-release.

bousozoku
Aug 5, 2003, 02:52 PM
Well, let's go back to the reason IBM chose the Intel 8088 for the IBM PC in the first place: someone on the project had worked with the 8086 for the Displaywriter word processing station. However, the 68000 was already running UNIX version 7 at this time.

When IBM needed to emulate a System/370 on a PC board, they used a 68000 for the XT/370 and later, a 68020 for the AT/370.

If Apple had waited until Intel had a competent solution, the Macintosh would have been nearly as big a mess as Windows.

giba
Aug 5, 2003, 09:39 PM
Originally posted by matthew24
Somebody should tell this guy; "You have been working for the wrong company for 20 years.".

How about somebody should tell this guy, "You should've been dead for about 20 years".

Cubeboy
Aug 5, 2003, 10:08 PM
Perhaps it's just me but it appears that we're seeing a rising trend in using "celebrity engineers" to push forward a companies marketing/PR plans.

I originally noticed this when Dirk Meyer, AMD's senior VP and co-architect of the original Alpha processor wrote a article on Extremetech endorsing 64 bit desktop computing and the Athlon64/Opteron in general. The article was affectionately titled "AMD's Future Vision" and lectured with the same idealistic tone as the arguments presented by Mr Gelsinger (AMD is about innovation, AMD is about the customer, AMD is commited to creating a better future blah blah blah). While the article was well written and technically sound, the author was obviously arguing from a PR perspective. That 32 bit chips (like Intel's) are obsolete and that 64 bit chips (like AMD's) are the future.

Now we notice many of the same things with this interview of Pat Gelsinger, Intel's senior VP and commonly regarded as "the father of the original 286 and 386 processors". Again, from the interview we see idealistic arguments being presented (Intel is about innovation, Intel is about the customer, Intel is commited to creating a better future blah blah blah, note that this sentence is copied from the above paragraph). Once again, the aurthor is presenting the case that Intel has the best solution and once again we see PR rearing it's ugly head only this time, the target is Apple, IBM, and there new G5. This was quite obvious from reading the article.

Anyone see this as well?
Could this be the new trend among companies?
Only time well tell. ;)

ipman
Aug 6, 2003, 01:46 AM
I thought the Intel guy was okay. I didn't agree with everything he said (tracking your kids is scarey), but at least he is passionate and fairly reasonable.

His views on Apple are hardly surprising. It isn't as though he was about to get up and say that he thinks the PPC architecture is a thousand times better than anything Intel have been able to accomplish! From an objective point of view, however, an article linked from MacBytes yesterday pointed out (by way of comparison to other chip makers) that Intel shuns contract based work: for Apple, which serves a highly specialised niche market, this of course would be Bad(tm).

In any case, my main gripe was the article quality itself! 1) the conversation is badly transcribed: does anyone proof-read this stuff? 2) the way the interview is written makes the VP of a major corporation sound like a high-school dropout who can't speak in full sentences: HELLO quality journalism people! It's not a user forum, it's a publication with paid writers!! [rant off]