On 18 Aug 2005 at 8:51, Johannes Gebauer wrote: > David W. Fenton schrieb: > > > > You think those chips were not in development long before Apple made > > its announcement? You think IBM said "Oh no! We've got to come up > > with a chip! To the labs, boys!" and two weeks later announced a > > finished dual-core processer? > > > > No, it was there all along, and could conceivably have done what > > Apple needed, but Apple had already decided, for other reasons, to > > abandon IBM. > > I really believe you are wrong. Apple has been waiting for Powerbook > usable G5 chips for a very long time, and the announcement to switch > to Intel was the direct consequence out of this dilemma. Had there > been adequate chips for Powerbooks, Apple would have used them. There > weren't. Even if IBM could deliver now, the problem is that Apple > wanted them about a year or more earlier, and the development of > Powerbooks had come to a complete halt already. > > To interpret anything else into this is reading tea leaves. There is > no facts to it.
Well, I didn't hatch this idea myself. I got it from the various commentators who've looked at the technical issues and determined that Apple was stretching the truth on the technical issue in order to obscure whatever their real agenda happens to be. Did you read the article I cited, or not? If not, then you're missing out on the whole picture. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
