everyone else who hasn't been living under a particularly large rock
for the last couple weeks, I've become aware of a couple things. Firstly, Apple has committed to moving its systems from PowerPC chips to chips from Intel over the next two years. Secondly, the media is terribly excited about this. I
have both PowerPC hardware from Apple and Intel-based hardware from
another vendor. It all runs Linux or OS X. I personally don't find this
transition to be anything that I have to worry about. But the
announcement, and the ensuing media coverage, have left me wondering a
few things. Fortunately, I had a flash of realization this morning. The
media has consistently portrayed this as a move away from IBM and
toward Intel by Apple. And that's not at all untrue - this does
represent a win for Intel, and a vote of no confidence in the future
roadmap of the G5 family. But
why, I ask, would Apple announce this now, when Intel's chips don't
really offer any …
Some time ago, I mentioned to someone that at least one of the
professors at the local university campus had, prior to becoming a
professor and teaching people about a field in which I work, held jobs
in that field quite similar to my own.She responded by enthusiastically encouraging me to become a professor too.
Honestly, though, I don't see it happening, for a few reasons.
Firstly, I can count all my college credits without running out of fingers.
Secondly, I am not known for my rigorous pursuit of academic excellence.
And finally, professors in this university system tend to be at the top of the field.
A quick read of the graduate faculty shows that we are blessed with
quite a few graduates of places like Berkeley, CalTech, Harvard, MIT,
Princeton, Cambridge, and so on. There are only two people on the
graduate faculty lacking PhD's - a librarian and a computer person.
The odds of me getting a PhD at all are slim, and the odds of me getting one from a school of as goo…