Clearly, since you're apparently out of the loop. HP has blown by them as the largest computer company in the world, by income, yet makes very little on software and service compared to IBM, whose server sales are declining, significantly, as I already linked above. IBM is trying to transition to a services company, ask the CEO if you doubt it. It may work out it may not, but they are desperately trying something, and now for basically the first time in recorded history, IBM is NOT the largest computer company in the world. They clearly have lots of supporters, but this is a dark time in their history, whether you're willing to admit it or not.
Apple’s decision to not use the Cell processor makes no difference to IBM’s plans for Cell or other Microelectronics division.
Hilarious, only about 10 million Mac CPU's per year, and how many iPhone CPU's is IBM potentially missing out on now too, another 10 million? Where is IBM even competing in such markets? They aren't. And they have no plans to, since all their chips are power hogs.
Now as to Jobs “never switching to IBM chips in the first place.” Again, you don’t know what you’re talking about.
LOL what? Jobs wasn't even there when they started getting their chips from IBM, who are you trying to fool? Gil Amelio tried to sell Apple's soul in 1994 by announcing the partnership with IBM, which almost destroyed the company. You must not have been there but these companies hated each other. The board ousted him and Jobs returned to what was left. His only mistake since was not switching to Intel earlier, and IBM is now left selling chips for nintendo's.
re: your claim that IBM sold off the Cell. Bullcrap. IBM has not sold off their Cell chip plants.
I never said they did, again, what are you talking about? Go back and READ, if possible, I said SONY sold their plants. More than once.
As for HP: HP is noe nothing but a hollowed out shell of what they once were.
Yeah, it must really sting you IBM guys to watch your company ditch PC products completely just in time to watch HP ride of wave of them to become the largest computer company in the world. IBM has even had to revive their old printer division once again to try to keep up, and they're having to supply their workers with Lenovo's now too LOL. That must be one depressing place right now, and I feel sorry for the good people who work there. They need new leadership just like Apple did, propoganda on a message board isn't going to help.
Where is IBM even competing in such markets? They aren't. And they have no plans to, since all their chips are power hogs.
IBM has had a wide range of low-power PowerPC chips widely used in high-end embedded applications. Until 2004, IBM had a series of very low-power chips for smaller applications (IBM sold that off). IBM was touting processing power per milliwatt while Intel was turning their chips into frying pans. It is only when the PPC970 hit that the PowerPC became a power hog, and that is because the PPC970 is based on IBM's POWER4 mainframe CPU.
Jobs wasn't even there when they started getting their chips from IBM, who are you trying to fool? Gil Amelio tried to sell Apple's soul in 1994 by announcing the partnership with IBM, which almost destroyed the company.
True, Jobs wasn't there. Apple was at the time getting its chips from Motorola. But the 68K line was getting old so Apple partnered with Motorola and IBM to come up with a new chip, the PowerPC. That chip made Macs much faster than their PC competition for years and was a reason for the company's survival. I had a friend with an early 90s PPC Mac who could play DOS games under emulation faster than I could on my 486. You also don't seem to know that Apple got its chips from Motorola, IBM and Freescale, not just IBM.
In fact, it was Motorola that disappointed Apple in the late G4 years by not being able to increase its performance enough. IBM was not supplying that chip. IBM extended the PowerPC's life at Apple by introducing the much higher-performance PPC970 (G5), but its power consumption and heat dissipation wasn't acceptable for laptops. Jobs needed one line of chips that could work across the board (the G4 and G5 architectures were compatible, but very different), and the PPC manufacturers couldn't provide it. Unlike you, Jobs is running a company, so can't afford to make decisions based on petty things such as hate.
and IBM is now left selling chips for nintendo's.
Only 25 million sold, each at a profit (Microsoft and Sony take a loss on each one sold).
They need new leadership just like Apple did, propoganda on a message board isn't going to help.
We finally agree, they need new leadership. So does Microsoft. But what is the difference between propaganda and talking about an industry-changing chip in a tech thread? It's already created the fastest supercomputer, is going into mainframes, made Folding@Home the fastest distributed computing project ever, is running this generation's most powerful game console, and is being integrated into high-end consumer electronics. That's quite a wide reach.
I haven't seen one demo of the Cell that wasn't impressive in every way, and neither have most industry analysts. I don't care what your ideology is, the Cell using only six of its eight SPEs to decode 48 simultaneous MPEG-2 streams, and one other to scale it all on one screen is impressive (yes, it did that with one SPE sitting idle).
Of course I know your difference between propaganda and talking a product's merits. If it's a company you like, it's merits. If it's a company you don't like, it's propaganda. You forget that we here think merits, while you and Stallman think ideology. That is probably why I can't get along with either of you.