| Page: 1 | Rating: Unrated [0] |
Apple Admits Blunder
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Wed Oct 15, 2003 @ 5:57pm |
 Coolness: 686270 | John Sculley admits Intel blunder
Apple should have adopted Intel chips when it had the chance, former CEO John Sculley said this week. Sculley served five years as CEO for Pepsi before being tempted by Apple's current CEO Steve Jobs to take that position at Apple in 1983, with the question: "Do you want to spend the rest of your life selling sugared water or do you want a chance to change the world?" Sculley left Apple ten years later. Speaking this week to a packed crowd at the Silicon Valley 4.0 conference, held at the Computer History Museum, in California, Sculley explained Intel's attempt to woo the company. In the late 80s, when Apple was using Motorola's 68000 series chips and considering its next step, Intel co-founder Andy Grove tried to convince the company to migrate to Intel chips. An experienced team from Apple's Cupertino HQ studied the idea but turned it down. Apple concluded that Intel's CISC (Complex Instruction Set Computer) architecture ultimately would not be able to compete against RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computer) processors, which had a more advanced instruction set, he said. Apple later adopted RISC. "That's probably one of the biggest mistakes I've ever made, not going to the Intel platform," said Sculley, who is now a partner in New York investment firm Sculley Brothers. History shows that Intel was able to keep its CISC architecture and bring the RISC instruction set into it. What Apple had underestimated was the power of Intel's overall system as a manufacturer, bringing billions of dollars to bear on the problem and solving it through evolution, Sculley said. "They never had to do a heart transplant," he said. Had it gone to the Intel platform, Apple would have had more options, Scully added. For one thing, not embracing the endless commoditization of Intel-architecture chips meant Apple couldn't compete on price against "the Dells of the world," he said. The die was cast. Apple took another path and ended up a different kind of company, Sculley said. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» somekid replied on Wed Oct 15, 2003 @ 6:41pm |
 Coolness: 85685 | risk is good *hidden sexual tension*(Hackers) |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Wed Oct 15, 2003 @ 6:44pm |
| Coolness: 686270 | "It's a P6 chip. Tripple the speed of a entium.
But you knew that... ;) |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Wed Oct 15, 2003 @ 6:57pm |
 Coolness: 340345 | John Sculley was the worst CEO apple ever had.
the man knew nothing about computers and was the reason apple fell into a pit and never really came out. Gill Amelio was ok, but wasn't really making the company do anything more then bring it out of the shit that Sculley had caused. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» nothingnopenope replied on Wed Oct 15, 2003 @ 7:50pm |
 Coolness: 201905 | I think apple should have began targetting the gay/artsy market earlier...
That's how they make all their money now... |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Wed Oct 15, 2003 @ 8:31pm |
| Coolness: 340345 | well obviously, gay people are richer.
why you might ask? cause they do men in the bum, why else would they be gay, phh. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» errorizE replied on Thu Oct 16, 2003 @ 3:43am |
 Coolness: 61520 | gay people are richer then most of us
according to stats canada. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» nothingnopenope replied on Thu Oct 16, 2003 @ 3:49am |
| Coolness: 201905 | yeah and nothing says style like a nice transparent computer |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Thu Oct 16, 2003 @ 4:16am |
| Coolness: 686270 | Yeah, now if only Apple's latest dual G5 didn't get beaten be a single processor with no multi-threading...
Athlon64 Vs. Apple G5 Vs. Intel Alienware systems are trashing dual G5s. It's pretty funny. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Thu Oct 16, 2003 @ 8:39am |
| Coolness: 340345 | err. you're talking about a G5 that was released 3-4 months before these new AMD chips..
i'm not sure why that would be so funny. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» little_sarah replied on Sat Oct 18, 2003 @ 6:24pm |
 Coolness: 122120 | *cough- computer nerds- cough* |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» OMGSTFUDIEPLZKTX replied on Sun Oct 19, 2003 @ 2:19am |
| Coolness: 67195 | you know
these benchmark tests are irrelevent because they put computers into unrealistic situations, not real life situations. As well, the whole apple vs. pc debate can be summed up into one word: Scalability. PC has it everything, Apple has a little bit. Maybe G5's are more powerful, but what good is power when you can't do much with it besides use iTunes? Its like saying you have a car engine that can do 0 to 60 in 3 seconds. Wow, great. Too bad you have no car, so that engine is useless. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Sun Oct 19, 2003 @ 2:23am |
| Coolness: 340345 | Video editing and graphic design is what the G5 is usefull for.
sure it doesn't have 3D Studio Max, but 3D isn't everything. All Adobe Apps are avail for OSX and Final Cut Pro is all you need for video editing. |
Apple Admits Blunder
| Page: 1 |
[ Top Of Page ] |
Post A Reply |
You must be logged in to post a reply.
[ Top Of Page ] |
