Embedded G5 usable in a portable device?
Assuming (a complete stretch of reality, I know) the iWalk device or something similar is real, could it be powered by the embedded G5 and run a variant of OS X? Is that thing too hot, too slow, or too expensive? What other technical limitations are imposed by the embedded chip that would keep it from being used in a PDA-like device?
I'm assuming it be too crippled for an iBook, but perhaps not?
PLEASE, no flames. PLEASE, no PDA war threads.
I'm just curious about the G5! I know this topic is treading dangerously close to some sore spots...
Thanks.
I'm assuming it be too crippled for an iBook, but perhaps not?
PLEASE, no flames. PLEASE, no PDA war threads.
I'm just curious about the G5! I know this topic is treading dangerously close to some sore spots...
Thanks.
Comments
The only public info about a "G5" class processor is the MPC8540. According to Moto, it is scheduled to ship later this year. It is designed for the embedded market (= low power consumption) so a "detuned" version of it may be sufficiently energy-efficient for a PDA-class device. The only significant difference with a desktop version would be that it lacks AltiVec.
IBM got Linux to run on a device the size of a wristwatch, so getting OS X to run on a PDA-style device ought to be possible.
So, my point is that what bunge is suggesting isn't complete fantasy or even all that improbable. Whether Apple would be trying to do such a thing is quite another matter, but I think the idea has sufficient merit that it is worth discussing, anyway. We may conclude in the end that it really is a silly idea, but that conclusion isn't obvious (IMHO) at the moment.
Bunge, I'm with you on this one. It's an intriguing idea. Just what would be the obstacles to using the 8540 in a PDA-style device?
Maybe this is a pointer to future digital hub devices.
Bunge, I think you'll enjoy a post I made in the "There is no G5" thread. (Work backwards from the end.) It has a link to a nice eetimes article about how cool the 8540 is.
Today's emoticon is <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
[ 02-25-2002: Message edited by: boy_analog ]</p>
Thanks. I checked out that article and it didn't actually have any info about TEMPERATURE, unless you meant cool as in 'neato'.
I'd like to see a price/performance chart for the embedded G5 and other competeing chips, like the ones used in current PocketPCs or the next generation Palm machines. Also, I've heard the iPod has two processors and if that's true I'd be curious to see a comparison of that as well.
Altivec notwithstanding, what type of performance differences would there be between a mythical desktop G5 CPU vs. the embedded chip?
<strong>Why wouldn't Apple want to use something like <a href="http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/products/powerpc/newsletter/oct2001/new-prod2.html"; target="_blank">this</a> if they wanted to run a slimed-down MacOSX on a small battery-powered device? Woudn't a G5 be somewhat over-the-top for a handheld little something?</strong><hr></blockquote>
At this point, I would agree. Given current PDA functionality, there just wouldn't be much need for a G5-class processor. On the other hand, what sort of functions could be built into a PDA-sized device that would take advantage of a G5's abilities? Maybe built-in speech-to-text functions for dictation while driving? A 6"x4.5" (perhaps a bit large - 4"x3" maybe?) LCD screen with VGA resolution would give it decent (albeit tiny) graphics capabilities. If it had a VGA port and could run PowerPoint, you have a presentation source that could fit in your pocket. There's lots of things it might do if it had a G5 that wouldn't be possible with a lesser processor. We just need to let our imaginations run for a while - think of it as a tiny laptop rather than a PDA.
<strong>OMFG!!!!!!! The stupidity of the first post boggles the imagination? Why? Why would you want that much processing power in a fscking portable device? WHY? Just so you could say that you have a G5 in your Apple PDA? Gawd! Get your head out of your ass and go take a one year vacation from computing in general. Jeez.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Mslee: Go take a Valium (or several) and lie down. And don't pick up any sharp objects for a while, either. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
A few years ago you probably would have been cursing at people who thought a G4 in a laptop was a cool idea. We're just spinning some fantasies and having some fun. I'm not claiming for an instant that this is practical or even reasonable - but nobody ever comes up with breakthrough ideas without contemplating some goofy ones. You're welcome to participate if you'd like, otherwise go away and keep your nasty remarks to yourself.
didn't catch this bit when i was reading the thread
[quote]PLEASE, no flames. PLEASE, no PDA war threads.<hr></blockquote>
carry on...
[ 02-27-2002: Message edited by: Jeremiah Rich ]</p>
<strong>OMFG!!!!!!! The stupidity of the first post boggles the imagination? Why? Why would you want that much processing power in a fscking portable device? WHY? Just so you could say that you have a G5 in your Apple PDA? Gawd! Get your head out of your ass and go take a one year vacation from computing in general. Jeez.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OMFG!!!! The stupidity of HP for putting a G4 in a PRINTER! Or the ignorance of Cisco for wanting the embedded G5 for a ROUTER!!!
OMFG!!!! Apple was so stupid to put a 166 MHZ processor in their 1997 Newton!!!!!
What? Apple now sells a GIGAHERTZ PowerMac? WHAT??!? It's a DUAL processor?!?!??
Careful kiddo or you might have an aneurysm. The G5 I'm referring to is the embedded G5 which is designed for small products, low heat environments and other non-desktop computer products.
Next time, think before you open your mouth.
Running X on a portable? Yeah...I'd like to introduce your to my iBook and my PowerBook, both of which run X. I think Apple has made them as small as possible, around the G3 and G4 processors, respectively. Now try and think of the real world problems that would arise if you designed a portable device around the 8450. Think before you post.
Why have that much power in a portable? Well lets see.... voice and handwriting recogition, finger print and face recognition log in, streaming video (MPEG4 if it ever makes it out), games, etc. etc etc...
This is the same type of silly argument as "Oh gee why does a desktop computer need to be so powerful for doing Word documents". Uh I think that would be because THAT'S NOT THE ONLY THING PEOPLE WANT TO DO WITH THEM!!!
Did your momma teach you to talk like tha?
Please don't give me this garbage about comparing a G5 in a portable PDA-like unit to a G3/4/5 in a desktop. Its a fallacious comparison. A desktop has two major advantages for accepting a G3/4/5-class processor...
1.) Room
2.) Power
Both of which are in short supply in a portable PDA-like device.
<strong>How does one propose to put a G3/4/5 in a portable device that can do "voice and handwriting recogition, finger print and face recognition log in, streaming video (MPEG4 if it ever makes it out), games, etc. etc etc...", even more to the point, how does one feed that processor? With the LiPoly battery in the iPod? Cmon. Think people. Furthermore, the ability to to do "voice and handwriting recogition, finger print and face recognition log in, streaming video (MPEG4 if it ever makes it out), games, etc. etc etc..." can be handled by StrongARM processors in PDAs and cellphones.
Please don't give me this garbage about comparing a G5 in a portable PDA-like unit to a G3/4/5 in a desktop. Its a fallacious comparison. A desktop has two major advantages for accepting a G3/4/5-class processor...
1.) Room
2.) Power
Both of which are in short supply in a portable PDA-like device.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think you're still missing the point. A 405LP (as heinzel and wmf suggested) or StrongArm is perfectly fine for a PDA that does everything a current PDA does. What we're trying to discuss is if an 8540 could possibly be used in such a device, and if so, what incredibly cool things might it be able to do (realistically) that is light-years beyond current PDA technology.
Now, the 8540 is designed for embedded applications (i.e. small space, low power - as pointed out by bunge). It's not a desktop chip so it has its own limitations, but it is several orders of magnitude beyond a StrongArm in its processing power. So don't think of a PalmPilot with a G5 (which is indeed pointless) - think in terms of a TiBook the size of a PalmPilot. That's a much more interesting proposition, IMHO.
Search for the phrase "wearable computers" and you'll see what I mean. We're not talking about appointment schedualing, to do lists and note taking and everything else PDA's are used for at the moment but rather the equivelent of a desktop or current laptop system in a Walman sized package that uses alternate display and input devices, such as HMD's (head mounted displays) and voice command input.
It is perfectly valid to look for this kind of computing power in a small device. I lug a Ti Powerbook around all the time and even do some video work with it, but as cool as they are sometimes it's cumbersome.