IBM, Sony, Apple: the new PPC alliance?

[Gizzmonic]

The new Sony Playstation 3 will use an IBM "cell" CPU. Ars-technica and other tech sites have mentioned the remarkable similarity between the way the "Cell" CPU and the PPC970 have been described.

I think it's safe to say that these CPUs will share a lot (they may even be the same CPU!). Meanwhile, other high-performance CPUs are fading into the sunset. HP is strangling PA-RISC and Alpha to make way for Itanium, MIPS is pretty much an embedded CPU now, Sparc is Sun only.

I believe that Sony will stay with the PPC for a long time. There are NO other high-performance CPUs besides Intel/AMD. Staying with the PPC would allow Sony to easily maintain backwards compatibility in future consoles, while avoiding compatibility with Xbox (if they used the same or compatible CPUs, you can bet someone would hack one of the other box so they would play each other's games).

Sony's huge amount of clout and capital can only be good for Apple. Their investments will help keep the PPC line alive and competitive with x86.

So...will we see an official PPC alliance between Sony, IBM, and Apple? Sony seems quite hostile to Apple at this juncture, but they are stuck with IBM. And Microsoft is quickly becoming an enemy for Apple (of course, Sony and IBM are already Public Enemies #1 and 2 for MS.)

People have been talking about how easily a PS3 emulator could be written for Mac OS X. But how about a version of Mac OS X for PS3 or PS4? This could be a ticket into millions of living rooms for Apple. They could even sell a Sony/Apple co-branded workstation as a "PS3 developers' kit."

Once Mac OS X is a bit more mature, Apple could license it to IBM for high-end servers and Sony for the PS3. In the far future, Sony could even roll its PC lineup over to PPC running Mac OS X.

I know Jobs hates cloning, but as long as it was kept exclusive to well-established names like IBM and Sony, I think it would be great for everyone involved...except Microsoft.

[MacsRGood4U]

Generally, Sony goes its own way and does not join competitors unless they have no choice (DVD-Toshiba is a prime example).

[KidRed]

IIRC the PS2 is ppc as well, so sony has been with IBM already.

[O and A]

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>IIRC the PS2 is ppc as well, so sony has been with IBM already.</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />

[heinzel]

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>IIRC the PS2 is ppc as well, so sony has been with IBM already.</strong><hr></blockquote>

...Sorry Dave. It's MIPS.
<a href="http://www.arstechnica.com/reviews/1q00/playstation2/ee-3.html" target="_blank">http://www.arstechnica.com/reviews/1q00/playstation2/ee-3.html</a>


;)

[@homenow]

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>IIRC the PS2 is ppc as well, so sony has been with IBM already.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Nintendo Game Cube is PPC (Customized G3 varient), not Sony PS2

[KidRed]

Ah ok, oops :) Think I got confused with a CNN report days after the PS2 launched that mentioned IBM doing the PS3 and somehow thought they did the PS2 as well.

[blue2kdave]

Why do you say Sony is hostile to Apple? I was quite surpries at the amount of time Steve gave to the SonyEricson head. I think that we might see something a little more formal between the two soon.

[os10geek]

Well, I don't know about the PS2, but I know that the "kiddy console", the Gamecube, runs an IBM "Gekko" chip. Whether the Gekko is in the PPC family I am unsure of, but it seems odd for two competitors to both be using IBM as a chip supplier...

[rok]

[quote]Originally posted by blue2kdave:
<strong>Why do you say Sony is hostile to Apple? I was quite surpries at the amount of time Steve gave to the SonyEricson head. I think that we might see something a little more formal between the two soon.</strong><hr></blockquote>

well, one obvious reason for that assumption is to quote his Steve-ness himself, years ago when asked if he would start going after folks like Dell. he stated that wasn't their goal, but and i (somewhat quote) "we're coming after you, sony."

steve's words, not mine

[THT]

The Nintendo Gamecube CPU is a modified PPC 750. A G3. The FPU was modified to run some 2x32 bit FPU SIMD instructions.

The Sony PS2 uses a custom MIPS ISA CPU. The Emotion Engine is a manufactured be a fab co-owned by Sony and Toshiba (I think).

The Sony PS3 plans to use a PPC "Cell" CPU. They are working with IBM.

It's more an alliance of coincidence. It's like saying Cisco, Ford, and Apple are a PPC alliance because their products have PPC chips in them. ;)

[Gizzmonic]

The reason I say that Sony is hostile to Apple:

1) Clies don't work out of the box with Macs. It's a PalmOS machine, there's no real reason why they shouldn't work. Yet they don't.

2)For years (and I'm not sure if this is still the case), the Sony online store did not work with Mac OS. At all!

3) Sony won't use 6 pin firewire. Even on some of its own CD-Rs that draw power from laptops, they use a proprietary power cable that hooks up through the laptop power supply. They are also starting to include USB 2.0 on all their cameras.

These reasons might be a little fanciful, but it seems to me that Sony is actively ignoring Apple. Perhaps they are jealous of superior style?

[Programmer]

[quote]Originally posted by THT:
<strong>The Sony PS3 plans to use a PPC "Cell" CPU. They are working with IBM.</strong><hr></blockquote>

There is no guarantee that the "Cell" chip for the PS3 will be a PowerPC. "Cell" refers to a particular multi-core architecture, not to something which is inherently PPC. It is possible that Sony and Toshiba could use IBM's Cell technology to build a multi-core MIPS processor.

[sCreeD]

Definitely, emphatically PowerPC: <a href="http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/business/industries/semiconductors/5310853.htm" target="_blank">eight of them</a> apparently.

[quote]With the PS 3, Sony will apparently put 72 processors on a single chip: eight PowerPC microprocessors, each of which controls eight auxiliary processors.

Using sophisticated software to manage the workload, the PowerPC processors will divide complicated problems into smaller tasks and tap as many of the auxiliary processors as necessary to tackle them.<hr></blockquote>

Screed

[onlooker]

F*IT!

[ 03-04-2003: Message edited by: onlooker ]</p>

[Addison]

[quote]Originally posted by Gizzmonic:
<strong>The reason I say that Sony is hostile to Apple:

1) Clies don't work out of the box with Macs. It's a PalmOS machine, there's no real reason why they shouldn't work. Yet they don't.

2)For years (and I'm not sure if this is still the case), the Sony online store did not work with Mac OS. At all!

3) Sony won't use 6 pin firewire. Even on some of its own CD-Rs that draw power from laptops, they use a proprietary power cable that hooks up through the laptop power supply. They are also starting to include USB 2.0 on all their cameras.

These reasons might be a little fanciful, but it seems to me that Sony is actively ignoring Apple. Perhaps they are jealous of superior style?</strong><hr></blockquote>


I agree with this post. There are other examples of Sony products that are delibertly knobbled on Apple computers.

Regarding USB2, even a blind man can see that within two years there won't be a firewire connector on any consumers DV-Video cameras. It is sad to say it but it is true, Sony has already moved to USB2 and I think Panasonic is following, bad days for Apple and what about all of those who have just bought the new 17" iMacs?

[@homenow]

[quote]Originally posted by Gizzmonic:
<strong>The reason I say that Sony is hostile to Apple:

1) Clies don't work out of the box with Macs. It's a PalmOS machine, there's no real reason why they shouldn't work. Yet they don't.

2)For years (and I'm not sure if this is still the case), the Sony online store did not work with Mac OS. At all!

3) Sony won't use 6 pin firewire. Even on some of its own CD-Rs that draw power from laptops, they use a proprietary power cable that hooks up through the laptop power supply. They are also starting to include USB 2.0 on all their cameras.

These reasons might be a little fanciful, but it seems to me that Sony is actively ignoring Apple. Perhaps they are jealous of superior style?</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm not sure about points 1 and 2, but on point 3 there is a reason. If I recall correctly, when FireWire was released, Apple was charging a licensing fee for using the name and logo. Sony didnt want to pay this fee for what was basically a license free technology using the 1394E name. Sony is in the buisness of marketing cosumer electronics, so they just made up, and marketed 1394E under their own name (iLink).

[PooPooDoctor]

[quote]Originally posted by rok:
<strong>

well, one obvious reason for that assumption is to quote his Steve-ness himself, years ago when asked if he would start going after folks like Dell. he stated that wasn't their goal, but and i (somewhat quote) "we're coming after you, sony."

steve's words, not mine</strong><hr></blockquote>

Steve is actually fond of Sony and thinks very highly of the company. I think you might have misread what he was saying.

[PooPooDoctor]

[quote]Originally posted by Addison:
<strong>Regarding USB2, even a blind man can see that within two years there won't be a firewire connector on any consumers DV-Video cameras. It is sad to say it but it is true, Sony has already moved to USB2 and I think Panasonic is following, bad days for Apple and what about all of those who have just bought the new 17" iMacs?</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" /> What are you talking about... Not the USB2 vs Firewire doo doo again.

[japh]

Just thought I'd point that Sony is a huge company with a multitude of subsidiaries. What the division that puts together the PlayStation does doesn't necessarily have any bearing on what their PC division is going to do(though a PPC powered Vaio laptop might be interesting).

[Programmer]

[quote]Originally posted by sCreeD:
<strong>Definitely, emphatically PowerPC: <a href="http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/business/industries/semiconductors/5310853.htm" target="_blank">eight of them</a> apparently.
</strong><hr></blockquote>


"apparently"


Since no official information has been released the industry is filled with a lot of supposition and guesswork. I hope its a PowerPC, since IBM is involved I think there is a good chance its a PowerPC, but Sony often does things a little strangely.

Oh, and even if they are PPC cores they aren't likely to be 970s. More likely 7x0 cores, hopefully with a VMX unit. 8 x 970 would be 200 million transistors, plus the 64 vector units and potentially quite a bit of embedded memory. If its going to ship around 2005 they won't be able to afford such a transistor budget. Of course I'll be very happy if I'm wrong. :)

[ 03-04-2003: Message edited by: Programmer ]</p>

[os10geek]

The camcorder industry, at least the professional sector, will switch to FW 800 with time. Just because many manufacturers have USB 2 enabled video recorders doesn't mean that FW 800 is a total flunk. It took a while for ieee 1394 to gain popularity on the PC, but look now.

[strobe]

[quote]Originally posted by os10geek:
<strong>The camcorder industry, at least the professional sector, will switch to FW 800 with time. Just because many manufacturers have USB 2 enabled video recorders doesn't mean that FW 800 is a total flunk. It took a while for ieee 1394 to gain popularity on the PC, but look now.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Why would camcorders use FW800? In fact don't most of them use FW100 now?

Unlike USB, with Firewire it's the same protocol.

[strobe]

To put it another way (making it mainfully obvious) any firewire device which is at the END of a chain doesn't slow down the whole bus regardless how slow it is. You can connect a FW100 device to a FW400 device to a FW800 device to your powerbook and they will all run full speed.

That's one of the inherent benefits of firewire!

[os10geek]

Posted by Strobe:
[quote] Why would camcorders use FW800? In fact don't most of them use FW100 now? <hr></blockquote>
Whoa, you are wrong on that one! #1, there is no such thing as FW 100. If you are talking about the original firewire, that is FW 400. And most camcorders, as of now, have support for ieee 1394, a.k.a. Firewire or iLink. And FW 800 is compatible with USB 2.0. :rolleyes:

[Kickaha]

FW800 is compatible with *USB 2.0*??

Er... can I have some of what you're smoking?

"And in the latest news, the PowerPC runs Pentium binary code..."

[Gizzmonic]

Most DV camcorders that I know of transfer at 100Mb/sec. I guess Firewire is always 400Mb or 800Mb, but the camcorders don't get that fast, because they can't read from the tape head and transfer the data any faster than that.

[hmurchison]

Whoa this thread kinda went OT.

FW can transmit at different speeds. Although this is transparent to the user.

For instance Yamaha's mLAN only caps out out 200mbps for Firewire. They have a new generation chipset that supports the full 400mpbs but initial incarnation only utilized the bandwidth necessary.

In 5 years HD Cams will be available that throughput more than enough to saturate a FW bus so FW800 will be needed.

Don't be suprised to see some Panasonic VTR's with FW800 spring up soon enough. HD Video can take up to 30+Mbps throughput.

I don't know why people continute to make statements like

"you don't need that bandwidth"

When has a computer or device EVER had too much bandwidth. It's the geek version of "you can't be too rich or too thin"

FW800 is more than just increased speed.

1. It supports longer cable lengths

2. The signalling has standardized on 8B10B same as Gigabit and Fibrechannel I believe.

3 the bus arbitration is more efficient.

[os10geek]

Sorry, it isn't USB 2 compatible. MY BAD. FORGIVE ME. But why use USB 2 when you have a faster, more reliable, and versatile standard?

[Leonard]

Talking about HD (High Definition) and Firewire, it looks like firewire is being used as the standard on recorders (currently DVHS) that record HDTV. More than likely firewire will become the standard input on DVHS and blue laser DVD recorders that record HDTV. The signal will then be outputed via the component outputs.

Firewire is definitely the way of the future.

[os10geek]

Originally posted by Leonard:

[quote] Firewire is definitely the way of the future <hr></blockquote>

Well, duh, of course! It's Apple we are talking about! :D :rolleyes: :D

[musicaltone]

Macworld UK is running the news that Apple is about to launch "an online music downloading subscription service for Mac users in collaboration with the big five major record labels", and goes on to quote the LA times that "no licensing deals have yet been announced, but that "at least four" of the five majors have "committed their music to Apple's service". Sony is reportedly not wholly on board at this time.

<a href="http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=6038" target="_blank">http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=6038</a>

Antonio

[AsLan^]

Also on the apple/sony thread, Sony clies may not work on a mac out of the box but they do provide a link on their (sony that is) website to the missing link, a $30 program that integrates your clie with some of the iapps. Im sure sony just doesnt care to develop software for osx as well as windows and rightly so, it would be nice if sony ditched windows though.

[Nevyn]

[quote]Originally posted by @homenow:
<strong>I'm not sure about points 1 and 2, but on point 3 there is a reason. If I recall correctly, when FireWire was released, Apple was charging a licensing fee for using the name and logo.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The 'flap' was about the _patents_ that a cabal of companies held, one of which was Apple. Sony was also one of the main cabal members/proponents -&gt; they had free use of the patents _anyway_.

Now some of the non-cabal members were irked about royalty issues (Say... Intel), so there was penty of moaning going on. But Apple, Sony, and 6 others (Phillips comes to mind) were 'cooperating' & cross licensing things to one another.

[os10geek]

A bit off subject:

Look at sony. Nice, beautiful hardware, expensive prices. It seems like sony is more like Apple than anyone else. Most Japanese manufactirers like the "Zen" component in their products. Then why doesn't Sony run the Mac OS?