4 Jun
2013
4 Jun
'13
10:32 a.m.
On 4 June 2013 17:10, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
Of course. But why I said what I said above, out of
exasperation, is that
you call architectures that are currently developed, sold, and used, and have
been for decades, with no end in sight, "failures". That's insane.
They went up against Intel. They used to come in a wide variety of
machines: low-end to high-end desktop, laptop, small server, big
server.
They don't any more. Now they are high-end or nothing.
And in say 5Y I suspect that they will have been forced out of that
remaining niche, too.
That is what I meant by "failed". I am taking a long-term view here,
encompassing their past and what looks very likely to be their
near-term future.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884