Stak - rE: "CPU DEVELOPMENT WILL GET MORE AND MORE COSTLY TO
BRING TO MARKET.SOFTWARE
AND O/S DEVELOPMENT WILL COST MORE BUT NOT
PROHIBITIVELY SO."
This isn't pertinent.
Microsoft or Sun or whatever introduces new O/S software or applications software that DEMAND EVER HIGHER PERFORMING processors.
The success of these software companies depends completely on Intel, or SUN or AMD (oh yeah?) to deliver more computing horsepower to run this new software.
How many x386 or x486 machines are sold these days to run Windows 95 or Windows NT?
Answer - not many.
What do you think Microsoft will recommend as a minimum system requirement for Windows 98? A 10 MHz 286 with 2 Megabytes of memory?
Hardly.
Now think of this -
Windows 95 rolled out in August 1995. Windows NT v. 4 rolled out in late 1996. No major O/S releases SINCE THEN!
In Novemmber, 1995, Intel rolled out the Pentium Pro.
In January, 1997 Intel introduced the Pentium MMX
In May, 1997 Introduced the Pentium II
In July 1997, Intel introduced the Pentium Pro with 1 MegaByte integrated L2 Cache
In September 1997, Intel introduced the low power 0.25 micron Tillamook for notebooks.
In September 1997, Intel introduced the 440LX chip set to support the AGP
In November, Intel introduced StratFlash, a new Flash technology capable of doubling non-volatile strogae density.
In 9 days, Intel will introduce a 266 MHz Tillamook.
At the end if January, Intel will introduce a 333 MHz Pentium II
At the end of February, Intel will introduce a 350 MHz and 400
Deschutes.
In the same time frame, Intel will introduce a 100 MHz 440BX chip set and the i740 3D AGP graphics accelerator.
And what has Microsoft squirted out in this time frame?
CONCLUSION - it may cost Microsoft LESS to roll out new software, but INTEL is more effective at technoilogy introductions DESPITE their higher costs. Intel spends their money MUCH BETTER than Microsoft.
Paul |
