17
March
2008
|
06:00 AM
America/Los_Angeles

Newswatch 3.18.08: Intel roadmap, media struggles, iPhone gripes

Intel roadmap. Intel announced that Dunnington, its six-core server processor, will ship in the second half of 08, and will be socket-compatible with the Caneland server/work station platform. The microarchitecture Nehalem will go into production in Q4 with a 45nm process. A 32nm version codenamed Westmere is scheduled for 09. (CRN) "The single biggest feature" in Nehalem will be a memory controller that speeds up data access from memory. (WSJ). But don't expect quad-core in your laptop anytime soon. Says analyst Roger Kay: "I've always used the adage, the hardware is ahead of the software is ahead of the user. I can imagine a small niche [of adopters] on the notebook side, but I still think it's going to be three to four years before [quad-core laptops] become mainstream." (Wired.)

Sad state of media. We know the media, especially newspapers, are in bad shape. But the Project for Excellence in Journalism's new report, State of the Media 2008, offers some room for hope among the ruins. Most importantly, journalists are still ready and willing to adapt to the new media, learn new skills and devise new ways of telling stories. Unfortunately, the business side is seriously lagging. "People used to think that the people on the business side would save journalism, but it's turning out to be the other way around in a lot of cases," PEJ director Tom Rosenstiel said. (Chronicle).

Don't call us dept. Almost everyone who downloaded the iPhone SDK got a nice 'thanks but no thanks' letter from Cupertino, reading, "As this time, the iPhone Developer Program is available to a limited number of developers and we plan to expand during the beta period." (Fortune) "I’m not surprised at Apple’s 'greet and toss' tactic - greet the high-profile big-name commercial companies and invite them in under the velvet rope, and toss out the riff-raff who were going to make their products available at a price (or lack of a price) that would mean that Apple wouldn’t be making money off the products." (Adrian Kingsley-Hughes).