Advocacy
Dojo (HowTo)
Reference
Markets
Museum
News
Other
Myths
Press
General
Hack
Hardware
Interface
Software
Standards
People
Forensics
Web
CodeNames
Easter Eggs
History
Innovation
Sightings
Opinion
Martial Arts
ITIL
Thought
|
Michael Slater has always been a Microsoft/Intel apologist that has his head implanted in Intels backside (and has for years). His claim to fame is as founder of Microprocessor Report, which has evolved to become nothing but an Infomercial for Intel.
Once again, he goes over the top, to prove his bias.
Basically, this articles premise is that Sun is the only RISC processor left, and it too will soon die out in favor of IA64 (Intel's new instruction set, for its upcoming, very high end, processors). Michael Slater is proclaiming IA64 a raging success, two years before we have seen the instruction set or any implementation of it.
Basically Slater ignores any market share of the RISC processors already out there -- especially the PowerPC. He doesn't even mention the PowerPC even though it outsells all the other RISC processors combined (probably by an order of magnitude). How you can write an article on RISC and not mention PowerPC is beyond me -- but not beyond Slater. Alpha, MIPS and all the others are also given the brush off or totally discounted.
It seems the technology is irrelevant (unless it is from Intel) -- the only thing Slater cares about are numbers of units sold (but then ignores that when it comes to PowerPC). Sun's Ultra-SPARC (which is a phenomenal chip, with astronomical performance) is the only one that he even considers discussing -- but only so that he can bash Sun and Scott McNealy for being "hold-outs" and not jumping on board the IA-64 bandwagon (before they've built the wagon, assembled the band, or set a destination). Most of the article can be summed by this quote --
Sun's strategy is anti-Intel... When I asked whether Sun would build IA-64 systems, Scott McNealy unambiguously replied, "absolutely not." But Sun has committed to porting Solaris to IA-64, making it easy to switch when the time is right. I'd expect McNealy to deny that Sun has any plans to build IA-64 systems right up to the day Sun announces them.
In other words -- Sun is wrong because they are anti-Intel (even though their processor is better, and has been shipping for 10 years), McNealy is wrong for making Solaris as widely available as possible (on high end platforms), and McNealy is secretly preparing for the inevitable switch that Slater hopes will happen. Whew, with such keen unbiased observations as this, I am sure glad I read Slater's Slants. [Sarcasm mode off].
I have grown to expect this kind of Intel-Biased boot-licking from Slater (of late) -- but it gets worse. In the past he was basically pretty sound when it comes to the technology (and discussions thereof) -- and occasionally offered technological comparisons and observations. But his brainwashing is complete, and he let what was left of his technical understanding fly out the Window in his latest article, or at least failed to make the most basic of observations -- IA64, and Intel's name for it, "EPIC", is just RISC. Intel make a new name for RISC (or VLIW) -- but we don't have to buy into it. This is the same as BMW trying to sell their car with, "It's not a car -- it's a Driving Machine". My fuzzy butt! It is a Car -- a slogan won't change that!
See the related article IA64 (EPIC) IS RISC.
So Slater's premise that IA64 will replace RISC, is like saying that the new BMW will replace cars. That he does not understand that, or failed to explain that -- is the final proof that he has his head buried so far up Intel's backside that he can't hear himself think. Next time I want to read Intel Propeganda, I'm going to shortcut the process, and go straight to the Intel web site -- rather than wasting my time and reading Slater's mind-numbed drivel.
|
