PeterH wrote: > > On Dec 4, 2008, at 9:54 AM, James E. Therrault wrote: > > >>It's a shame that IBM was not up to the task of delivering low power >>Power PC chips for laptops. But this is nothing new, IBM failed to >>adapt >>their (PS 2) OS to the Power PC maintaining compatibility with earlier >>versions of the OS on Intel processors. > > > IBM was very late with the G5 primarily because it didn't want to > include Altivec in its then next generation PPC. > > Yet, when that next generation came out, it did indeed have Altivec. > > IBM is quite happy making highly integrated PPC "solutions" for the > very, very, very large volume clients out there, > > In a very real sense, Apple was just one fly on IBM's many sh!ts. > > Still, IBM is cranking out PPC chips by the gazillions, for its own > use, and for others, and it really doesn't miss Apple's business. >
I'll stick with my statement. I have worked with IBM as a contractor and generally this company was a large inflexible monolith where the term "innovation" was virtually a non entity. If one makes an agreement, it should be kept. JT --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
