> we're talking about future hardware, not present.

I look forward to PowerMac G5 support in MorphOS. While being present hardware in general it's nevertheless future hardware in terms of MorphOS ;-) But you're right that due to their target market's special nature most new Power Architecture CPUs (especially the more affordable ones) probably don't (and won't) meet let alone exceed a 1.5 GHz G4 in raw performance.

> MorphOS is useful on not fast computers.

Sure. It's certain applications that require raw performance, not MorphOS in itself.

> That new computer barely exists, and yet one has to think about a succesor!

I was trying to make a certain point. For that I needed a hypothetical X1000 successor for illustration purposes. Look at it as some kind of thought experiment.

> That's a new twist on the "Osborne Syndrome"!

Nobody's announced an X1000 successor as far as I can see. The computer hardware principle that a successor should be superior to its predecessor surely wasn't invented by me.

>>> If only making a new computer would take half a year...

>> What does "half a year" refer to in context of PA6T availability?

> I'm saying that, by the time you finish the new computer, the CPU
> will no longer be available.

Apple will have the PA6T manufactured until mid-2011 at least. By that time and assuming the X1000 will still not be commercially available the actual development time will have crossed the 2.5 years mark. That's as much as five times "half a year" ;-)
But you're right in that A-Eon could get into hot water if they don't get the X1000 to market soon. That's assuming Apple really choose the minimum time they're obliged to have the PA6T manufactured *and* don't find anybody to buy the design from them.