AMD isn't the only company guilty of slips....
jc-news.com
"99/06/15, 11:21pm - A friend of mine (who's very bright but fervently anti-Merced) was just complaining in general, and I became curious as to when the Merced was originally supposed to be released, since it's something vaguely like a year late, schedule-wise. Or so I thought. The very earliest article I was able to find on Merced dates way back to September 1996. The expected release date? Late 1998. Whoa! This frankly amazed me! I mean, Merced was supposed to be a fully ready cpu, being sold and delivered half a year ago, and it turns out that Merced that we know will appear in second half of 2000, but will really just be some sort of "prep" cpu for the real IA-64 chip, McKinley! Huh? I did some more checking, and it got weirder. Looking at this slightly later article was an experience in itself. Deschutes (0.25um PII) was originally expected for Q4'97 release (over a quarter year late, it came out in mid-April, 1998). Katmai was expected in the first half of 1998 (it finally reached us a year late, this February). Willamette was expected in late 1998. Wow...I kinda had the idea Willamette was slightly late, but I'd no idea it was this bad! It's almost like as if Intel completely stopped doing R&D for a year and a half! Thank goodness the PIII "Coppermine" processor is on track! " |
