IBM's Chief Architect Says Software is at Dead End

j2xs writes "In an InformationWeek article entitled 'Where's the Software to Catch Up to Multicore Computing?' the Chief Architect at IBM gives some fairly compelling reasons why your favorite software will soon be rendered deadly slow because of new hardware architectures. Software, she says, just doesn't understand how to do work in parallel to take advantage of 16, 64, 128 cores on new processors. Intel just stated in an SD Times article that 100% of its server processors will be multicore by end of 2007. We will never, ever return to single processor computers. Architect Catherine Crawford goes on to discuss some of the ways developers can harness the 'tiny supercomputers' we'll all have soon, and some of the applications we can apply this brute force to."

Comments

stupid article

[tomstdenis]

Why do the individual cores have to become slower? Am I missing a logical step here?

Let's see, we have efficient and fast ALU/FPUs now. All of a sudden they'll become totally inefficient because we've gone quad-core?

Hey, biatch from IBM [or just poor reporter], shut your ignorant gob.

Tom

Bah

[Idimmu Xul]

What do women know about computers? Someone tell her to go play Barbie.

Architect

[cowscows]

Architects design buildings.

If engineers want to call themselves system architects, or chip architects, or something like that to try and pretend that they're somehow better than normal engineers, whatever. But don't refer to them with the title of Architect followed by their name. To design buildings and sign your name as a licensed architect has real legal implications, and a long and expensive process is required to get to that point.

It's very similar to the term Doctor, which you generally should not go around referring to yourself as unless you truly are a doctor. Just because architects aren't as well paid or respected as doctors in our culture doesn't mean it's ok to steal the title.