MacWorld in New York - 2002 is Apple's year - Page 10

Maybe Dorsal M knows what he's talking about and maybe he doesn't, but one thing's for sure. JYD is bi-polar.

One day he touts a given rumor as proof that an amazing Power Mac upgrade is coming, the next day he claims Apple is doomed. Get something through your head dude: NO ONE here has verifiable knowledge of ANYthing in terms of future Apple hardware. Therefore, the wise course of action is to not buy into any of it too much (whether its optimistic or pessimistic), and stop trying to predict Apple's future based on a friggin trade show, OK?

Find something better to do with your time.

[quote]Originally posted by Moogs:
<strong>Maybe Dorsal M knows what he's talking about and maybe he doesn't, but one thing's for sure. JYD is bi-polar.

One day he touts a given rumor as proof that an amazing Power Mac upgrade is coming, the next day he claims Apple is doomed. Get something through your head dude: NO ONE here has verifiable knowledge of ANYthing in terms of future Apple hardware. Therefore, the wise course of action is to not buy into any of it too much (whether its optimistic or pessimistic), and stop trying to predict Apple's future based on a friggin trade show, OK?

Find something better to do with your time.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Exactly!

I agree with JYD in concept, at least... I have no doubt that we most likely won't see much more than the SpyMac rumour at MWNY. I also have no doubt that at some point in the not-too-distant future (i.e. 12 months, and no that isn't too long) we will see a radical architecture change and a new processor that will significantly improve performance. The new technology machine will likely be along the lines of what Dorsal, TheRegister, etc have described. It will arrive when it is ready and can be produce en mass, but we have yet to see any believable information on when that will be.

Yeah!

[quote]Originally posted by Nonsuch:
<strong>

I've been reading moki's MacNN posts for many months, and never had a doubt it's the same fellow.

Besides, what would be the point of spoofing moki only to be just as reticent as he is on MacNN?</strong><hr></blockquote>

I can guarantee that's the President of Ambrosia Software. Believe it or not.

--Alexis

[quote]Originally posted by Moogs:
<strong>Maybe Dorsal M knows what he's talking about and maybe he doesn't, but one thing's for sure. JYD is bi-polar.

One day he touts a given rumor as proof that an amazing Power Mac upgrade is coming, the next day he claims Apple is doomed. Get something through your head dude: NO ONE here has verifiable knowledge of ANYthing in terms of future Apple hardware. Therefore, the wise course of action is to not buy into any of it too much (whether its optimistic or pessimistic), and stop trying to predict Apple's future based on a friggin trade show, OK?

Find something better to do with your time.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Amen.

Here we go again...

BUMP!

Come on Dorsal M, let us know what is going on...!

Although, I probably won't get a new PowerMac until after MWSF2003, a new laptop will have to do until then...

Sure would be nice to see a 1GHz TiBook w/SuperDrive...! And maybe (call me crazy) Apple could manage to get the nVidia Quadro2 Go GPU (64MB DDR) in there.

But I would expect that won't happen until MWSF2003 either...!

Cheers!

<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> Maya for Mac OS X <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />

[quote]Originally posted by Alexis:
<strong>

I can guarantee that's the President of Ambrosia Software. Believe it or not.

--Alexis</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, but why should be believe you? You could all be cream popsicles for all I know.

And stop bumping this thread just for the sake of bumping it. I'm sure another Dorsal post will get noticed no matter what. He's either a real mole, or he's a very patient spoof of a real mole... either way, he can probably find his last post.

don't you hate when folks edit out their entire post...?!?

<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> Maya for Mac OS X <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />

[ 06-28-2002: Message edited by: MacRonin ]</p>

OT
Ok since Dorsal is taking a break I shal take it upon myself to entertain you mac people with Teh Funnery for aprox 2.85 seconds.

Teh Funnary starts now!





[elided]

Teh Funnary ends now!

If my PC hadn't complety melted down (and I meen total destruction here), and as such wasnt forced to use crappy broadband, on a crappy IBM thinkpad (eraser heads are the spawn of satan) I would be able to find more.

Back on topic!

[ 07-01-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by lundy:
<strong>

Yeah, it's him. The real Dorsal has 12 posts.</strong><hr></blockquote>

No I don't believe so as there are two posts showing the count as 12. They can't both be right.

Addison, as soon as you post, all of your post counts go up. Check your own post counts on other threads.

Mandricard
AppleOutsider

[quote]Originally posted by Mandricard:
<strong>Addison, as soon as you post, all of your post counts go up. Check your own post counts on other threads.

Mandricard
AppleOutsider</strong><hr></blockquote>

Oh I never realised that. I thought they increased sequentially. Sorry.

Oh dear, the rumor mill has started to swallow its own tail....<a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/29060201.htm" target="_blank">Inquirer speculation about G4s at MWNY</a>

[quote]Originally posted by BobtheTomato:
<strong>Oh dear, the rumor mill has started to swallow its own tail....<a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/29060201.htm" target="_blank">Inquirer speculation about G4s at MWNY</a></strong><hr></blockquote>

Apart from my <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001827" target="_blank">thread</a>, whose raison d'etre was destroyed by Programmer's link to an article today in the Register (and which was not even a rumour, more an analysis of the possibility), where are these other rumours of an AAPL takeover of SGI?

To be honest, these guys approach to this article appears to be the recycling of much of the content contained here on AI, presenting it as serious editorial content and then charging advertisers. How they then have the gall to make an All Rights Reserved statement on the webpage is beyond me!!

Just my $0.02!

Not sure where to post this link or even if its relevent but here it is:

<a href="http://www.marvell.com/Internet/News/Show_News_File/1,2410,387,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.marvell.com/Internet/News/Show_News_File/1,2410,387,00.html</a>

Its a press release about controllers that incorporate an advanced, high-performance 100 Gbps crossbar switch architecture for G3's, G4's, and MIPs processors.

Is this the next Powermac:

"The Discovery II MV64360, MV64361 and MV64362 devices are designed for PowerPC processors such as Motorola's MPC74xx and MPC75x families and IBM's 750Cxe/FX series CPUs, and support both the 60x and the advanced Motorola MPX bus protocols. They are the only system controllers to support Symmetrical Multi-Processing (SMP) in both 60x and MPX modes, resulting in highest processor performance.

Both the Discovery II MV64340 and MV64360 devices are full featured system controllers, offering a 72-bit DDR memory controller with a 183 MHz clock rate (366 Mbps data rate), on-board 2Mb SRAM, dual 64-bit PCI/PCI-X interfaces, PCI bridge and arbiter, three 10/100/1000 Mbps Ethernet controllers, two multi-protocol serial channels, and I2C and interrupt controllers.

The Discovery II MV64341 and MV64361 controllers offer a 72-bit DDR memory controller with a 183 MHz clock rate (366 MHz data rate), on-board 2 Mb SRAM, dual 32-bit PCI/PCI-X interfaces, PCI bridge and arbiter, two 10/100/1000 Mbps Ethernet controllers, two multi-protocol serial channels, and I2C and interrupt controllers.

The Discovery II MV64342 and MV64362 each provide a 72-bit DDR memory controller with a 183 MHz clock rate (366 MHz data rate), single 64-bit PCI/PCI-X interface, PCI bridge and arbiter, a single 10/100/1000 Mbps Ethernet controller, I2C and interrupt controllers. They are targeted for system solutions employing a single processor and requiring minimal communications functionality."


This would not be bad at all!

From the same page:

[quote] * High level of integration incorporating up to three Gigabit Ethernet MACs, up to two PCI-X interfaces, and DDR memory support, allowing for the quick development of next-generation systems. <hr></blockquote>

Well, it doesn't get any more plain than that, folks. Along with this new Discovery II architecture, Apple will be beefing up its Gigabit Ethernet Macs with DDR memory and PCI-X. Excellent!


...


Yes, I know. It was a joke.

(dare I state the obvious to this dude and point out the acutal quote of his quote which is "MACS" and not "Macs".)

This has nothing to do with computers from Apple, Inc. It does have to do with communications, though.

Yup the Ethernet MAC has nothing to do with Mac. Seriously don't get too excited.

What would you do wth three-1Gb/s Ethernet Controllers?

Hey mugwump, ihxo and Bigc, I almost went for the 'Post Reply' button myself...

iconmaster said:

[quote]Yes, I know. It was a joke.<hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> Maya Unlimited for Mac OS X <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />

<a href="http://www.marvell.com/Internet/Products/products/1,2414,1-44-218-46,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.marvell.com/Internet/Products/products/1,2414,1-44-218-46,00.html</a>

Where's my Quad CPU, ECC DDR366 Power Mac already!

The current Uni-N (Apple Northbridge) has 1 Gigabit MAC, with a PHY doing timing.

Three Gigabit MACs mean that an Xserve with 2-4 onboard ethernet controllers would be cheaper for Apple to produce.

I'd be happy if someone ported Darwin to one of their reference platforms

Barto

[ 07-03-2002: Message edited by: Barto ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by MacRonin:
[QB]Hey mugwump, ihxo and Bigc, I almost went for the 'Post Reply' button myself... <hr></blockquote>


Ah yeah, he is clearly on top of things

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

My God... this is great news!.
[quote] "Enabling even more applications to take advantage of Motorola's high-performance PowerPC ISA-based host processors, the new Marvell Discovery II devices provide support for our advanced MPX bus protocol," mentioned Bill Dunnigan, Vice President and General Manager of Motorola's Computing Platform Division. "The combination of Motorola's award-winning MPC74XX processors and these new controllers delivers a high performance, high bandwidth solution with compelling price and power dissipation advantages." <hr></blockquote>

This seems to solve the MPX bus incompatibility with DDR. By offering solutions for both the MPX and a DDR 183 MHz memory controller... wow! I am stocked about this one. Great find!

Does this have multiple MPX busses (which explains the 2MB of SRAM for syncing)?

Barto

There is no MPX/DDR compatibility problem, as the MPX bus has nothing to do with what memory controller (be it SDR/DDR SDRAM or RDRAM) is used.

The fact that this is networking (lots of non CPU-Memory communication) orientated (4 DMA controllers, 1 onboard gig-e, 3 onboard gig-e MACs, 64-bit PCI), would explain the pairing of MPX/60x with such high speed (366MHz effective ECC) DDR RAM, but here's hoping: does this have multiple MPX/60x buses?

Barto

[ 07-03-2002: Message edited by: Barto ]</p>

As far as I can tell, controllers from Marvell are not used in any current desktop machines. Can anyone confirm this? The Discovery series and <a href="http://www.marvell.com/Internet/Products/Product_Family/1,2413,1-3,00.html" target="_blank">other PPC system controllers</a> seem to be exclusively marketed for embedded and high throughput networking applications. Do any of you hardware jocks know what the Discovery II series lacks that would be needed in a desktop machine?

Hmmm, I also just noticed that Marvell is <a href="http://ir.shareholder.com/MRVL/stock2.cfm?period=03" target="_blank">getting hammered</a> pretty badly on the Nasdaq over the last few months. Is this a sinking ship? (or should I say... stinking chip? <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" /> )

Edit: changed URL

[ 07-03-2002: Message edited by: wormboy ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by Barto:
<strong>There is no MPX/DDR compatibility problem, as the MPX bus has nothing to do with what memory controller (be it SDR/DDR SDRAM or RDRAM) is used.

The fact that this is networking (lots of non CPU-Memory communication) orientated (4 DMA controllers, 1 onboard gig-e, 3 onboard gig-e MACs, 64-bit PCI), would explain the pairing of MPX/60x with such high speed (366MHz effective ECC) DDR RAM, but here's hoping: does this have multiple MPX/60x buses?

Barto

[ 07-03-2002: Message edited by: Barto ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Multiple MPX/60x buses connected to one bridge controller are probably nonsense, because MPX bus is not point to point topology (as the athlon bus) but a shared bus (as PIII, or Xeon)
Perhaps a hardware guru can put some light on this.

Moto answer to this problem is RAPIDIO, simmilar to Hypertransport by AMD hammer cpu.

rooster

Though I'm no hardware expert by anymeans, but, I can read (Press releases)... to paraphrase Moki

These aren't the boards you are looking for...

Marvell as far as I know is in the business of building hardware for routers and high end telecom equipement. The communications industry also uses Motorola chips hence they are mentioned in the press release. I'm quite confident that these boards have absolutely nothing to do with Apple or "computers". Though I really wish that these boards and specs did have something to do with Apple, I'm afraid that isn't the case.

Please someone prove me wrong...

Superd

(Edited for clarity)

[ 07-03-2002: Message edited by: superd ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by wormboy:
<strong>As far as I can tell, controllers from Marvell are not used in any current desktop machines. Can anyone confirm this? The Discovery series and <a href="http://www.marvell.com/Internet/Products/Product_Family/1,2413,1-3,00.html" target="_blank">other PPC system controllers</a> seem to be exclusively marketed for embedded and high throughput networking applications. Do any of you hardware jocks know what the Discovery II series lacks that would be needed in a desktop machine?</strong><hr></blockquote>

By Chris Rijk
Thursday, June 20, 2002 8:24 AM EDT Purchase the PDF


2-way Apple PowerPC systems


Chipset architecture: The basic architecture is similar to Intel's dual processor systems - two CPUs sharing a bus with an ASIC ("GT-64260") that has a memory controller. However, it seems the chipset Apple uses has the southbridge integrated as well, which should save costs, power, size and increase (I/O related) performance a little bit. Up to 1.5GByte/s of SDRAM is supported, though a newer chipset supports up to 2GByte/s of DDR SDRAM.

the link:http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=50000226

rooster

Well Apple is supposed to be "working with another chip company", right? Perhaps the Xserve uses one of these Discovery chipsets?
Or maybe it has nothing to do with Apple.

Cnet are running a story that Jaguar will be ready at the begining of August. This would tie in nicely with a new processor/motherboard configuration, assuming that they are shipping in april.

[quote] "The combination of Motorola's award-winning MPC74XX processors and these new controllers delivers a high performance, high bandwidth solution with compelling price and power dissipation advantages." <hr></blockquote>

If this controller can turn the G4 (MPC74XX) into a "high-bandwidth solution" without cutting out its MPX bus, why in the world wouldn't Apple jump at the chance to use it in a PowerMac?

So, Rooster pointed us to a link that said that:
[quote] 2-way Apple PowerPC systems


Chipset architecture: The basic architecture is similar to Intel's dual processor systems - two CPUs sharing a bus with an ASIC ("GT-64260") that has a memory controller. <hr></blockquote>

So, in fact, current dual processor machines do in fact use this Marvell controller (GT-64260 is a Discovery I part number).

The Discovery II series does in fact offer a controller designed for a single processor PPC based system, as well as dual processor systems. I think we will be getting these controllers on new machines announced at Macworld NY.

Given this, what implications does this have for overall system specification??

Edit: Discovery... Dimension... whatever.

[ 07-03-2002: Message edited by: wormboy ]</p>

Personally, I don't know much about the systems, companies, etc. But when that guy above posted this link, I had heard of Marvell before. Didn't Dorsal or someone else here on these boards post that the *NEW* chips will use Marvell.

My point is that I have heard of this company before in relation to a rumor regarding MWNY, and then this comes a couple weeks before. So my gut feeling is that this will be the technology in the new G4's.

[quote]Originally posted by Addison:
<strong>Cnet are running a story that Jaguar will be ready at the begining of August. This would tie in nicely with a new processor/motherboard configuration, assuming that they are shipping in april.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Time travel?

Reckless use of Quantum Processors?

[quote]If this controller can turn the G4 (MPC74XX) into a "high-bandwidth solution" without cutting out its MPX bus, why in the world wouldn't Apple jump at the chance to use it in a PowerMac?<hr></blockquote>

Because they already have the Xserve controller.

[quote]Originally posted by Dorsal M:
<strong>All in good time.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah you see Dorsal has to lay low a little while longer to see what the rumor sites start reporting so he can put his educated "guess" together as to what Apple is doing. We all agree that these guesses are written very very well but like Kormac there seems to be that "...I don't know what Apple did? Maybe there was a last minute change cause the systems were ready..." type thing after the Macworlds. Dorsal has been ready once and that was the 466, 533, 667 & 733 machines. Since then he has been off.

Sorry if I go against the 'praise Dorsal' grain here, I just don't buy it anymore.

Well my mention of Dorsal wasn't in praise. I simply had only heard of that company in relation to a rumor. *MAYBE* it means something, maybe not. But I just found it interesting. I think that the listing of actual processor part numbers that Apple uses in the press releases is pretty simple to understand. Either the tech. is there for Apple to use if it wants too, or the tech HAS been used. Personally I think Apple would be stupid not to take them up. And so what if they typically only make these systems for routers, etc. everything that is needed to boost Apple's line is here. Granted, having 3 Gigabit ethernet switches might be a bit overboard, but I'm sure some program or the future will find use for this.