This sounds like a lot of smoke and mirrors to me. They’re blaming Apple, in a left-handed way, of holding them back. Nothing has prevented them from pursuing these other markets before now. And one might argue they didn’t do a very good job supporting Apple in the past.

Smoke and mirrors is right. The "Future" they are talking about (in game consoles) is processors with designs that will be locked in stone for the next five years. And if they are no longer concerned about "PowerPC as a PC processor" then what good will Linux boxes do them? By loosing Apple, they've lost the #1 reason why anyone would want to write Linux for PPC.

These guys had the world on their plates, and they blew it by taking Apple for granted.

who's to say that the next, next-gen consoles will use IBM/Freescale processors anyways? yeah, it's a good plan now, but they better hope to god that they have a backup plan incase they lose sony's bid in the future...

Quote

"...where both the volume and innovation are more significant (than Apple)," according to Freescale chairman and CEO Michael Mayer

Ah, sure--that must be true. Apple must have said to Freescale and IBM, "Please don't innovate to make superior processors, guys. We just want the same old crap forever."

Yeah, thanks for clearing that up, Mike...

As you'd expect from two old companies like IBM and Freescale (nee Motorola).

However, there is much truth behind their trumping of embedded applications, like automobiles. But even that may be tenuous since there were exploring selling that business off not too long ago.

Quote

who's to say that the next, next-gen consoles will use IBM/Freescale processors anyways?

That's right. R&D for a chip for Apple would pay as soon as the chip shipped. Now they are in for a 5 year wait before the research on that generation chips pays a dime. What other use for PPC demands as much computing power as a game console?

who the day Apple left STILL didn't know they'd left. The VPs of marketing in New York had their heads so buried in the sand and were caught so unaware by the announcement (wouldn't you like to know how I know!) they might as well be standing in front of church naked for their first communion.

C-L-U-E-L-E-S-S

Quote

algr wrote:
And if they are no longer concerned about "PowerPC as a PC processor" then what good will Linux boxes do them?

By running linux on those other things that it's currently better suited for than "Personal Computers" - embedded devices, servers, network appliances, set-top boxes, and all the others I'm too lazy to remember before my first coffee of the day.

Problem is that embedded devices and games consoles are in many ways at opposite ends of the spectrum in designing a chip, so I am not too sure how that combination will help. As IBM and Freescale pretty much went their own ways years ago (and pretty much sold out Apple in so doing) i am also not sure how they intend to collaborate now with their increasingly divergent markets. Apple was the only major customer who kept some much needed cohesion in their divergent plans for PPC which is why IBM originally re motivated themselves to keep Apple on board with the G5, and then predictably lost interest again once they did and thought they were hooked. Fact is I am sure that each will do reasonably well in their particular markets but I seriously doubt that those markets will make either that much of a fortune once the development costs have been factored in after all it is now considered that the cost of Cell to Sony is going to be a real problem for Sony in terms of the unit price for playstation3.

Do not forget that Mac-fans, only a year ago, would not have believed Apple is going to go: Intel.
Now we Mac-fans are already buying Mac-Intel computers and as soon Intel starts to deliver multi-OS Intel, whatever the name, chips, the profesional Mac Users have a lot more possibilities.
Steve Jobs and Apple must have had a hard time to make another change in the Macintosh history.

When Apple announced the shift toward Intel's CPU, people commented that the move wouldn't hurt IBM or Freescale pocket. Those guys, rationale was based on Apple's PC market share! not on PowerPC market share.

No doubt Apple still is pretty much PPC market share! considering the fact that Apple is the only PC player using it!. Last quarter Apple reported 1.2M Mac sold!! Going from 1.2M to 0 in 2 year span is a rough call to anyone, even IBM who only use PPC for its big iron!.

Keep in ming that Game Console are not using full bloom PPC CPU, Xbox360 use 3 Cell cores and PS will too.

Some of these comments rubbishing IBM/Freescale do look awfully similar to things being said about Intel a year ago.

IBM does not use PPC in its 'Big Iron' servers - those are full POWER chips. They do offer PowerPC in their blade servers, as well as Xeons. For 'personal computers' well.... IBM doesn't make those anymore. It is strange that IBM and Freescale weren't more interested in giving Apple a laptop chip, in keeping with their "POWER everywhere" ideas, but I doubt they're exactly quaking in their shoes.

memory, sound and video cards, north bridge memory control even FW 800, compatability is a multi market across the board scenario that was lacking in the IBM / Apple team. Apple's miniscule share of the market not a lucrative market. Apple Intel much better.

Everyone is forgetting that Apple was dying when IBM saved their butts.