G5 = PPC 970 ?

[MacMatt]

Please don't flame me as silly as this sounds. I just don't know...

Will the IBM chip 970 be renamed the G5? of course if Apple would use this chip.


I know Motorola was working on a new chip , but Is this not what Apple uses for marketing, the G3, G4, G5 code names?

[ 10-17-2002: Message edited by: MacMatt ]</p>

[snoopy]

IBM and Motorola use part numbers for their chips officially. Apple has been using the G3 and G4 in literature about their products, so it is not tied to a particular chip. I expect Apple to call the IBM 970 a G5. As IBM advances, to 975 for example, it will still be called the G5 by Apple.

[wfzelle]

[quote]Originally posted by snoopy:
<strong>IBM and Motorola use part numbers for their chips officially. Apple has been using the G3 and G4 in literature about their products, so it is not tied to a particular chip. I expect Apple to call the IBM 970 a G5. As IBM advances, to 975 for example, it will still be called the G5 by Apple.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I doubt it. It would probably be far too confusing. I'd expect something clever or perhaps just GPUL.

[BRussell]

[quote]Originally posted by snoopy:
<strong>IBM and Motorola use part numbers for their chips officially. Apple has been using the G3 and G4 in literature about their products, so it is not tied to a particular chip. I expect Apple to call the IBM 970 a G5. As IBM advances, to 975 for example, it will still be called the G5 by Apple.</strong><hr></blockquote>I don't think so. The G5 does exist in the form of 85xx processors from Motorola, and they're not the same as this 970. And there's still a possibility (maybe remote now) that a 75xx chip, a desktop G5, will be produced by Motorola. That would be a different chip than this 970, and it wouldn't make any sense to call them both G5s.

I think it will have a different name completely.

[mrmister]

I bet a different name too, just because I think everyone is tired of the "G" naming scheme.

[Mr. Me]

[quote]Originally posted by mrmister:
<strong>I bet a different name too, just because I think everyone is tired of the "G" naming scheme.</strong><hr></blockquote>You think wrong. Most of us are waiting for the G5. We would sell grandma's false teeth to buy one.

[KidRed]

There's been debate that the 'G' Apple uses is for generation. In that sence, yea, they should name the 970 the G5.

[RANSOMED]

From a marketing standpoint, I'd say that Apple shouldn't change its 'G' trademark, unless their about to begin a readical change in their product line. Although with the 'digital hub' direction they are taking, I doubt it. Just like they did when the G3 came out.

Anyway, who knows? I love surprises...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Logic can take you from A to B. Imagination can take you anywhere"
-Albert Einstein

[mrmister]

[quote] I'd say that Apple shouldn't change its 'G' trademark, unless their about to begin a radical change in their product line. <hr></blockquote>

Exactly my point. They want people to feel there has been a radical change, at LEAST as big as when they changed all the Macs to PowerMacs.

The g4's reputation, amoung PC folk, is that it is slow. That's the grim truth. If you think the G4 is slow, and you hear,

"Don't worry, it's a G5!"

It doesn't fill you with as much confidence as it could.

I think that the sad truth is that the G4's branding is not so hot, and a new, clean break to a new naming scheme might be better for shedding a bad reputation.

[Brad]

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>There's been debate that the 'G' Apple uses is for generation. In that sence, yea, they should name the 970 the G5.</strong><hr></blockquote>Last I checked, Motorola is the one that uses the Gx monker for the generations of chips. Apple just carries that over to its own products.

[BigBlue]

I think they'll stick to 'G'. Why change ? Intel will not call the next gen Pentium's 'Hexagonal 5' or something. Everybody knows the Pentium. It's like Coca-Cola.
Maybe a nice game for fun: guess what Apple will call their new chip. H5 ? X1 ? HolyCow 5 ? ;)

[Brad]

Again, G3, G4, and G5 are all Motorola names.

See page 5 of this document:
<a href="http://e-www.motorola.com/collateral/PPCRMAP.pdf" target="_blank">http://e-www.motorola.com/collateral/PPCRMAP.pdf</a>

and for those of you who don't like downloading PDFs:
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:JZPxwbau_wQC:e-www.motorola.com/collateral/PPCRMAP.pdf&hl=en&ie=UTF-8" target="_blank">http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:JZPxwbau_wQC:e-www.motorola.com/collateral/PPCRMAP.pdf&hl=en&ie=UTF-8</a>

The G5 is the 8500.

I honestly can't see Apple naming IBM's chip the same a Motorola's chip.

[ 10-17-2002: Message edited by: Brad ]</p>

[snoopy]

[quote]Originally posted by Brad:
<strong>

Again, G3, G4, and G5 are all Motorola names. . . I honestly can't see Apple naming IBM's chip the same a Motorola's chip.

[ 10-17-2002: Message edited by: Brad ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

How do you explain the fact that there is an IBM 750 in some Mac products, and Apple calls it a G3?

There is nothing to stop Apple from using G3, G4 and G5, nomatter who makes the chip.

[Brad]

blah. forget it. it's not worth arguing over.

[ 10-17-2002: Message edited by: Brad ]</p>

[liquidh2o]

hehehe lets' hope apple doesn't go overboard w/ the whole i(name) scheme. Instead of a G5 we'd have the i5.

When i say i5 aloud, it does sound kinda sexy, like a fast bmw car. And the i could represent IBM as the maker or something, who knows. I think I have way too much time to think about this, so i think i'll stop :)

[ 10-17-2002: Message edited by: liquidh2o ]</p>

[TommyBrando]

[quote]Originally posted by snoopy:
<strong>

How do you explain the fact that there is an IBM 750 in some Mac products, and Apple calls it a G3?

There is nothing to stop Apple from using G3, G4 and G5, nomatter who makes the chip.</strong><hr></blockquote>

/ \
|
He's right. IBM had nothing to do with the marketing name of the chip it sells to apple, they called the 750 or whatever, apple calls it the G3, even though motorola is the original G name carrier. Personally, i dont give a flying **** what they call it, just stick it in a powermac ane LEMME AT IT!!!

[BRussell]

[quote]Originally posted by snoopy:
<strong>How do you explain the fact that there is an IBM 750 in some Mac products, and Apple calls it a G3?

There is nothing to stop Apple from using G3, G4 and G5, nomatter who makes the chip.</strong><hr></blockquote>Because the G3 is from the days of the AIM alliance. The G3 IBM and Motorola made were the same. Motorola's G5 and IBM's 970 are not the same.

[DHagan4755]

Apple will call the new processor the X1. The PowerMac X1. The PowerBook X1, etc.

[snoopy]

This discussion may be a little pointless anyway. Apple will call it what ever they wish, nomatter what we think about it. If Motorola has copyrights to G4 and G5, then Apple will have to come up with something new. If they have no copyrights, Apple is free to use G5, if Apple chooses to. G5 is just my guess, which is no better than anyone eles's guess.

[Eupfhoria]

If 'G' stands for PPC generation, wouldn't the 970 be the G6, if motorola's newest processor is the G5?

[snoopy]

[quote]Originally posted by Eupfhoria:
<strong>

If 'G' stands for PPC generation, wouldn't the 970 be the G6, if motorola's newest processor is the G5?

</strong><hr></blockquote>

"If" Apple sticks with G nomenclature, these would be generations of processors for Apple, would they not? I don't think Apple will care that Motorola has their own version of a G5. The IBM 970 would be Apple's G5. Again, no one knows what Apple will call it.

[wfzelle]

[quote]Originally posted by Dave Hagan:
<strong>Apple will call the new processor the X1. The PowerMac X1. The PowerBook X1, etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Juck. You could as well call it PowerMac XP ;)

[MacMatt]

Does IBM make G4 chips ?

both seemed to have G3s...

[Fat Freddy]

[quote]Originally posted by MacMatt:
<strong>Does IBM make G4 chips ?

both seemed to have G3s...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes in the early days of the G4. They helped MOTO to produce, i think.

[Scott]

[quote]Originally posted by Eupfhoria:
<strong>If 'G' stands for PPC generation, wouldn't the 970 be the G6, if motorola's newest processor is the G5?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Are a bother and sister of the same generation?

With a Mot G5 (no word of it yet) and a IBM 970 coming in a year or two what would Apple do if both were used? Not the same CPU but the same generation? Hummm?

[snoopy]

[quote]Originally posted by Scott:
<strong>

. . . With a Mot G5 (no word of it yet) and a IBM 970 coming in a year or two what would Apple do if both were used? Not the same CPU but the same generation? Hummm?

</strong><hr></blockquote>

If Apple uses G5 to identify a certain family of chips, starting with the IBM 970, they will decide what makes it a G5. Here is my guess about it. G3 is the basic chip. G4 runs all applications for the G3, plus allows software to take advantage of the Velocity Engine instruction set. G5 runs all applications for the G4, plus it is a 64-bit processor and runs 64-bit code.

There are a lot of other parts of a processor, but it ability to use certain software features is what stands out for many, if not most, customers. Whether a processor can be used in duals, quads or more only matters to Apple, and what kind of hardware they can build with it. Likewise the type of bus just makes a difference in computer performance, much like clock rate. What code it will run stands out as the obvious distinction between these generations, in my opinion.

[rambo47]

New chip, new manufacturer, new direction. Time for a new name, something that tells us more than simply "G4" or "G3". Just call it the IBM 970. No worries about what revision a particular chip is, the name is the version. Simple. And besides, the G nomenclature is Motorola's own scheme. Here's their roadmap:
http://homepage.mac.com/rseijas/.Pictures/moto.jpg
To see the above chart for yourself on Moto's site the link is here: <a href="http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/overview.jsp?nodeId=03M943030450467M983989030230" target="_blank">http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/overview.jsp?nodeId=03M943030450467M983989030230</a>

[ 10-20-2002: Message edited by: rambo47 ]</p>

[snoopy]

[quote]Originally posted by rambo47:
<strong>

New chip, new manufacturer, new direction. Time for a new name . . .

</strong><hr></blockquote>

You could be right. Apple may want to signal that the Mac is taking a new direction. How better than to break with using G to identify the processor. Makes sense to me. But G5 is still a possibility, with about equal odds in my book.

If Apple goes with a new name, it will probably not be IBM 970, though the specifications may have this. The 970 is "the first in a family of new PowerPC processors," as stated in the IBM news release. Apple will want some way to identify this family. Using G5 is an easy way to do it, but Apple may indeed say it is time for a new name, as you say. Dave Hagan mentioned X1.

[Eupfhoria]

I, for one, am tired of X's in names...
it's old, tired and used.
I would acutally be happy if they ditched letters alltogether.

Will prolly happen about as soon as car manufacturers do it.

[iNub]

PowerMac SS :D (Super Sport)

[Belle]

[quote]Originally posted by iNub:
<strong>PowerMac SS</strong><hr></blockquote>
Project Name: Heimlich Himmler.
Advertising logo:

http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/processed_new_images/ss-bolts_150.gif

[Barto]

The Power Mac G4 used a G4. It now uses a G4+. However, it is still called the Power Mac G4.

What I expect Apple to do is "Power Mac G5 [as in 5th Generation Power Mac] using the PowerPC 970 and Radeon 10000".

Barto

[haunebu]

[quote]Originally posted by Belle:
<strong>
Project Name: Heimlich Himmler.
Advertising logo:

http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/processed_new_images/ss-bolts_150.gif</strong><hr></blockquote>

Uh, yeah Belle... :rolleyes:

And it's not Heimlich, ala the "Heimlich Maneuver." I think you meant Heinrich Himmler.

[Anders]

Is this the kind of thread we are going to have for the next 14 month <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

What the hell. I´m going to add my two cents: It won´t be called 970 for the same reasons that the G4 wasn´t called 7400, 7410 etc.

Why not H1? Same idea taken to the next level.

[ShallowThroat]

ha, come on, it's not a hummer.

I agree with it NOT being called the 970, so the question remains, what will apple call it? (If they even buy it)

I liked the i5. that does sound good, but if they are gonna change the letter coefficient, then why continue the number scheme?

"The All New, Apple i1" perhaps?

I hope they don't continue the current naming scheme, it's too intel-like. (G3, G4, G5 = P1, P2, P3, P4, etc...)

So...maybe they will give it a name it's own,

"The All New Apple Nucli Desktop"

it will be interesting to see, thats for sure.

-ST

[Belle]

[quote]Originally posted by haunebu:
<strong>Uh, yeah Belle... :rolleyes:

And it's not Heimlich, ala the "Heimlich Maneuver." I think you meant Heinrich Himmler.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, I meant exactly what I said. The fatal flaw in the whole plan being that exactly zero percent of my post was in any way funny. I see that now. I wish I had the power of forehindsight.

[Please note: There is another deliberate mistake in this post intended to be humorous. I also wish I learned from my mistakes.]

[Kecksy]

I'm sure Apple will replace the Gx naming scheme with something fresh and exciting, but who cares, really? It's just a name. I wouldn't matter if they called it SuckMac, people would still buy it if it was faster than the G4.

[Outsider]

They should simply rename the lines powerMac, PowerBook, iMac, and iBook. Them they could fire half their marketing department and hire some engineers in their place. ;)

[Thereubster]

[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:
<strong>They should simply rename the lines powerMac, PowerBook, iMac, and iBook. Them they could fire half their marketing department and hire some engineers in their place. ;) </strong><hr></blockquote>

:D Give this man a job at Apple and sack ALL the marketing dept. (I hate marketing...) ;)