Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (
More info?)
Robert Myers wrote:
> I'd be very surprised if Intel didn't regard Microsoft's x86-64
> decision as a declaration of war. That is to say, Microsoft already
> _has_ optimized its code for AMD.
Why would it be offended? In the end, it saved Intel a lot of money
having to adopt AMD's instruction set, instead of trying to develop its
own from scratch. And Microsoft waited to release Windows until Intel
was ready to release its own chips.
And of course Microsoft has already optimized for AMD, who else were
they going to optimize for? It was there 1.5 years before Intel, and
much longer if you count pre-production chips which it would absolutely
have given to Microsoft first. Hell, even Microsoft's programming header
files call the platform "AMD64". Linux headers are actually more kind
towards Intel by calling the platform by the more generic "x86-64".
>>Also MSFT has even greater cash reserves than INTC, and
>>can use some of it to help AMD increase production.
>
>
> That would and should produce a shareholder revolt at Microsoft.
Sort of like the shareholder revolt that happened after Microsoft gave
cash infusions to Apple and Corel when they were looking shakey?
>>Besides, IBM may
>>use the capacity freed by G5 to fab chips for AMD.
>
>
> IBM's fab capacity is limited by its ability to make money making
> chips, which it hasn't been doing in quite a while.
IBM doesn't seem to be able to produce anything with any reliability.
Nvidia was originally going to use IBM's Fishkill as its main source for
Geforce GPUs taking the job away from TSMC, but IBM had production
problems and Nvidia had to give it all back to TSMC.
Cray contracted IBM to produce the data router chips for its Red
Storm-line of supercomputers. Again, IBM had trouble producing enough of
them. To make matters worse, due to this delay, IBM itself was able to
get its own various supercomputers released earlier than Red Storm. Cray
has since gone on to give the job to TI.
IBM seems to not be very good at applying its own knowledge to its own
production. It's able to help people like AMD out with new production
processes, and AMD goes on to use it well. But IBM can't seem to improve
production in its own fabs.
> All the feathers are already ruffled. There is simply no way that
> Gates cannot be taking a dark view of the Intel-Apple deal, and Intel
> is already furious over 64-bit decisions (x86/Itanium) by Microsoft.
> The only question is where the bodies lie when the shooting stops.
Intel has nobody to blame but itself for its Itanium failures. As for
x64, it had nothing of its own, so it was likely going to use AMD's
stuff anyways.
Yousuf Khan
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram