* "We expect to apply Cell to a wide range of applications related to broadband networks, including digital consumer electronics and mobile terminals…the Cell development project is proceeding as planned." - Takeshi Nakagawa, a senior vice president with Toshiba
DeadmeatGA wrote:
I don't think even Sony headquarter cares.
See here:
* TOKYO — Sony Corp. and its Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. (SCEI) unit on Monday (April 21) announced a $1.7 billion (¥200 billion) investment plan for 65-nm process technology on 300-mm wafers.
* Sony's investment will beneficial not only to SCEI but to whole Sony group, said Kunitake Ando, president and Sony Group COO. Ando said Sony is buying nearly $8.4 billion worth of ICs annually.
* This announcement by SCEI and Sony is a confirmation of the progress we've made with the Cell design itself, of our advances in semiconductor technology to help it reach its full potential and of Cell's far-reaching implications for a wide variety of applications. - Dr. John Kelly, senior vice president and group executive for the IBM Technology Group
Deadmeat, can you stop your bullet-time worthy performance not didge the argument Vince made ?
Either put up or shut up, it is that simple: no insults, no flames.
I will almost guarantee you that Kutaragi will have different ideas about the future of entertainment in a couple of years, abondon CELL, and comes up with something "better". This is Kutaragi Ken's nature.
If they came up with a successor to Cell which is better than Cell or if they came up with Cell 2.0, why not use it ?
See, your little game goes around and around the same notion: you think Kutaragi and his staff ( not to mention the engineers they collaborate with to come up with the "better ideas", which includes worl experts in top notch universities and senior MPU Architects from some of the biggest companies in the world [like IBM and Toshiba] ) are clueless morons that somehow managed to create ( yes, the SAME guys who worked on the PlayStation 2 architecture, the PSP and are working on the PlayStation 3 ) one of the most advanced Hardwares of its time ( in 1994 the PSOne was the hottest topic between Japanese game companies: Namco was simply floored by the PSOne design and Ken Kutaragi was deeply involved with the PSOne project ) and a ultra-successful consle like PlayStation 2 ( play Silent Hill 3, Z.O.E. 2, GT3, watch GT4 videos, play WRC2, watch WRC3, etc... remember that the PlayStation 2 came 1+ year earlier than the two competitors [two PC product cycles] and look at the competition's games... yeah, baaaaadly flawed design ).
Cell is not the Emotion Engine... Cell is destined to morph and permeate in as many products as they see fit and the important issue of the APU ISA compatibility across all products ( an Apulet/Software Cell can basically execute on any APU, on any device, on any network ) was thought to help this scenario and make it a reality.
Have you ever given the thought to the possibility that SCE chooses a Cell 2.0 or a "better than Cell' idea that takes care of compatibility of old Cell code and that is designed to be
modular and scalable just like Cell was designed ( this is a
design goal that, IMHO, will stay as it has many benefits in the path towards pervasive computing as a reality for the masses ) ?
Maybe Sony, IBM and Toshiba definition of "better" includes taking care of the Cell 1.0 compatibility problem and carry on the Apulet legacy ?
Maybe, a solution which would just throw away all the progresses Cell has made would not be considered better than Cell or not good enough ( until the problem is taken care of ) ?
IPv6 did not kill RIP, OSPF or BGP: the concepts these Routing Protocols were founded on lived and evolved with the evolution of IP.
SCE has seen the market evolving and has tried to stay on the bleeding edge of technology pushing for innovation aggressively.
Nintendo has done the complete opposite after the SNES years... they stuck their head in the sand pretty much ignoring the Sony threat, kept until the GCN high licensing fees and were not anywhere helping 3rd parties the way they should have ( the N64 days of throwing out one of your own American employees, who is there to learn how to assist better the American 3rd party developers in coding for the RCP, from a meeting with SGI did leave its mark and the treatment of 3rd parties on the GCN was more like "ok, if you really want to, come aboard we made it easier to code this time, but we will not loose sleep if you do not support the GCN in mass" ) developed at their own slow pace without an ounce of additional aggressiviness, refused to learn from their mistakes ( in the N64 days, before launching the GCN, they said "well, we made a mistake not assuring a costant flux of quality titles to the N64, etc..." and now they are saying "well, we made a mistake with the GCN not assuring a constant flux of quality games": see the issue ? ) and did not really observe that the market was evolving towards multimedia centers rather than pure gaming consoles.
