Robert Myers wrote:
As I read the signs and portents coming from both Intel and IBM,
though, the technology should not be taken to be mature and the
market could be headed for chaos.

Why because they're having trouble getting good power consumption out of
their 90nm processes? What relevance has that got with whether the
technology is mature or not? The technology itself is mature because it's
been around forever. Nobody cares how it's made though.

In particular, the von Neumann architecture is a technological dead
end

Wow, I'm not even touching that. Where'd that come from?

No two ways about it, the disappointing performance of Prescott
matched against the technological success of AMD/IBM have forced
Intel to scramble, but it's a reasonable guess that Intel has
actually known for
a while in what direction it was going to scramble when forced. The
fact that Intel didn't take the future they've been hinting about
seriously enough to come up with a more mature marketing campaign does
suggest a certain level of denial at the highest levels of Intel
management, though. ;-).

I'm sure the scenarios have been played out within Intel for some time.
Knowing about all of the possible scenarios is one thing, but knowing
exactly which scenario is going to play out is to become god.

Yousuf Khan