or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › G4 iMac - are we missing the MAJOR problem with this?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

G4 iMac - are we missing the MAJOR problem with this?

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
It just came to me then. If apple release a G4 equiped iMac, say at 1000mhz.......


Will it ever go beyond 1.2ghz?

The G4 has problems scalling, we all know that. The G3 doesn't seem to - 233 -> 1000, and surely with IBM at the reigns it'll continue.

Understand?? I don't think apple want the RISK - of another moto fiasco - but this time on their (higher selling?) consumer line!

I think there is something long termish to be afraid of with a G4 in the iMac.... Hopefully not, but there is a easy chance
post #2 of 28
I do not see a G4 iMac coming at MWSF anyway...
post #3 of 28
Actually IBM hasn't done much better than Moto. They've supplied a 700 Mhz G3 to date. Moto has at least supplied an 867Mhz G4. These arguments about Apple not using faster G3's because of the limits on G4 speeds just don't wash. At no time has IBM offered a chip that is faster than 700Mhz (and only recently). IBM is holding Apple up at least as much as Moto. Based on their past record, there is nothing to suggest that IBM would indeed scale better than moto. Nothing.
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #4 of 28
I guess the same could be said for the PowerBook G4 as well then. Why would Apple put a G4 in it if it can't scale very well?...

The fact is that ever since the G4 has been around, it has just been a very difficult chip to scale, but that doesn't mean that Apple will just give up hope. Motorola has (slowly) conjured up new ways of pumping more power out of it, the same way IBM has with the G3, and it will most likely continue.
"We're not gonna stop."
- Steve Jobs
Reply
"We're not gonna stop."
- Steve Jobs
Reply
post #5 of 28
If IBM and Moto "sucked it up" and started adding pipeline stages to their chips, they would scale like Intel chips too.

post #6 of 28
isn't the apollo supposed to scale higher well? that's the impression i got......i hope so
post #7 of 28
But if they stick with the G3 until they reach its ceiling, what happens when the iMac jumps to the G4, especially if the G3 will ultimately scale higher? Can Apple take the iMac from a 1.6 GHz G3 to a 1GHz G4 without massive public outcry?
post #8 of 28
Neither of those chips exist yet. Once again, there is nothing to recommend that IBM can scale any chips at all faster than motorola. Neither of them has scaled G3 or G4 much faster than the other.

Where does this Moto is holding up IBM stuff come from? IBM is holding up IBM. And togther the PPC alliance is holding up the entire Mac platform.

You won't see such a disparity between IBM and Moto chip speeds, so relax.
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #9 of 28
G4 the iMac will be. Required for the SuperDrive it is. SuperDrive the iMac will have. Endless cycle I am going in here, yes.
post #10 of 28
[quote]Originally posted by InsideAppler:
<strong>G4 the iMac will be. Required for the SuperDrive it is. SuperDrive the iMac will have. Endless cycle I am going in here, yes.</strong><hr></blockquote>

FYI: That's going to get really old, REALLY quick. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #11 of 28
If the G4 can't scale above 1.4GHZ (hypothetically speaking) it might not matter. Lets assume Apple starts the new iMac at 800mhz and only goes up to 900mhz. The next revision will be 1Ghz and 1.1 and then the next will be 1.2 and 1.3 and the final will be 1.4. By that time (maybe almost 2 years later) its time to move the G5 to the iMacs.

That might work. The iMacs only go up to 700mhz right now, so starting the new models at an 800mhz G4 sounds like a pretty big improvement.
Be quiet, Brain, or I'll stab you with a Q-tip
Reply
Be quiet, Brain, or I'll stab you with a Q-tip
Reply
post #12 of 28
[quote]Originally posted by Matsu:
<strong>Actually IBM hasn't done much better than Moto. They've supplied a 700 Mhz G3 to date. Moto has at least supplied an 867Mhz G4. These arguments about Apple not using faster G3's because of the limits on G4 speeds just don't wash. At no time has IBM offered a chip that is faster than 700Mhz (and only recently). IBM is holding Apple up at least as much as Moto. Based on their past record, there is nothing to suggest that IBM would indeed scale better than moto. Nothing.</strong><hr></blockquote>

OMFG!!! You are SO WRONG! IBM has had the ability to produce MUCH faster G3's than Mot has G4's....for a long time! Apple is the G3's biggest customer.....they wouldn't ship faster G3's than G4's......that absolutely DOES WASH!!!!

BASED ON THEIR PAST RECORD???? WHAT???? IBM has the best Fab process in the world! They could have sacked Mot, but Mot owned the rights to the G4!!!

As far as the scaling problem goes..the Apollo's won't have the same problem the originals did. I would bet that Steve Jobs personally told Mot management that he was about to sue the living shit out of them based on their lies to Apple. We know Apple has gotten involved and Mot has straightened out the fab process....since that time yields and speed have increased.

Whatever!

[ 12-23-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #13 of 28
[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

OMFG!!! You are SO WRONG! IBM has had the ability to produce MUCH faster G3's than Mot has G4's....for a long time! Apple is the G3's biggest customer.....they wouldn't ship faster G3's than G4's......that absolutely DOES WASH!!!!

BASED ON THEIR PAST RECORD???? WHAT???? IBM has the best Fab process in the world! They could have sacked Mot, but Mot owned the rights to the G4!!!

As far as the scaling problem goes..the Apollo's won't have the same problem the originals did. I would bet that Steve Jobs personally told Mot management that he was about to sue the living shit out of them based on their lies to Apple. We know Apple has gotten involved and Mot has straightened out the fab process....since that time yields and speed have increased.

Whatever!

[ 12-23-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

care to back that up?

the G3 is widely used in embedded devices. each major increase in clockspeed for the G3 has come after a major redesign/revision of the G3. IBM has never had much higher clockspeeds available than Motorola. both the G3 and G4 clock similarly. the only thing more impressive about the latest G3 which is not available yet is that it clocks up to 1 Ghz without adding pipelines
post #14 of 28
Best FAB or not, it certainly hasn't been cranking out high speed G3's. Fact is that IBM has NEVER supplied higher speed chips to any other customer in the embedded market. There was some corporate whine about altivec, and the media more than anything else created the myth that G3 could scale better than G4. Where is the evidence for that? Apart from process improvements like die shrinks and copper, there hasn't been any significant re-design of the G3 core. Why would a 4-5 stage G3 scale better than a 7 stage G4? Or for that matter provide better SIMD performance when it lacks an SIMD unit? It can't and it doesn't! Even now, with the upcoming Sahara, details suggest they done precious little to the core itself. Rather, they've thrown a bunch of fabrication technology at it, to make it cool/efficient enough to clock up some more (and include a nice big on die cache). Were they just sitting on all this tech? Low-K dielectric, SOI, and .13u copper fab? NO! It wasn't ready yet! None of their other designs used it and no one else in the industry did either. Now with all this tech, they will deliver 1Ghz parts. Mot already delivers 867 (with a very good SIMD), furthermore they've done it without the more exotic fab techniques. By the time we get 1Ghz sahara, G4 will offer at least as much clock speed, yet with a more advanced core.

Fact is, if you look at IBM's other designs, none of them are particularly high clock rate parts. The Power3, 4 etc, while very powerful chips, don't run at blazing clock rates, far from it. In fact, energy efficient, fast but 'low clock' chips are as much a part of IBM's recent Microprocessor design as they are of Motorola's.

This myth that IBM can save Apple would be better forgotten. If they had cared about Apple, they'd have licensed altivec sooner and provided G4 equivalent parts. They have dragged their feet at least as much as Moto, if not more. Even their current design focus, on efficiency and power consumption, looks primarily to the embedded market, and then to the personal computer market.
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #15 of 28
[quote]Originally posted by CosmoNut:
<strong>

FYI: That's going to get really old, REALLY quick. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

What do you mean "going?" It already was really old.

Oh, and Matsu is right. There's no empirical evidence that IBM or the G3 scales better than the G4. G3 from 1998-2001: 233-700 MHz. G4 from 1999-2001: 350-867 MHz Any talk about higher clock speeds is speculative because it hasn't happened -- it's only been announced.
post #16 of 28
[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>

care to back that up?

the G3 is widely used in embedded devices. each major increase in clockspeed for the G3 has come after a major redesign/revision of the G3. IBM has never had much higher clockspeeds available than Motorola. both the G3 and G4 clock similarly. the only thing more impressive about the latest G3 which is not available yet is that it clocks up to 1 Ghz without adding pipelines</strong><hr></blockquote>

Perhaps....but it I have heard, as I thought most had, that IBM was able to deliver faster chips but was prevented form doing so by legal agreements with MOT.....perhaps that was wrong....
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #17 of 28
Thread Starter 
IBM has always had substancially higher speed chips in the ready, merely held back by Apple's persistance of not having a higher clocked iMac than the top G4. Sad really.
post #18 of 28
It is business as usual at Apple with Jobs there.
Motorola has the fabrication and technology.Mr.
Jobs prefers a slower chip than truly necessary because he gets a better price.Care to guess how much Apple pays per chip per 1,000 or 10,000 Especially, when he has a monopoly on the chips.
That is why alot of people in the industry do not trust Steve Jobs..He lied in the past to Wozniak
his founding partner.It is called greed.And marketing,marketing , and more marketing.Like
Michael Jackson.A performance.We are in the year 2001 not 1975.The technology is there.Whether
it is for sale...business as usual.Horizontal and
vertical markets?Perhaps it is not a hardware war
but a software war instead.Hewlett-Packards 15"LCD,
CDRW/DVD 30Gig,256 Ram,Pentium 3 1.2 GHz and Windows 98 is not bad for $1,700.00 Maybe we hardcore Apple consumers need to chill and let Apple be until Sept. 2003 G-5 8500 1.8 Ghz
I will start saving now. Watch Apples stock drop...
Now they need patches for DVD or is it CDRW
on O/S-X? Like cabbage patch dolls does the new
iMac flat panel, G-3 maybe 1 GHz come with papers?Ground breaking consumer toy.By 2003 O/S X will have all the patches and kinks worked out.Awesome...By then you will also pay alot less
for the G-5 because AMD will be manufacturing it
for Apple.It will be cheaper and cost effective.
We all win.Ours hope wont be so high and we wont let down.With the ground breaking iPod.Seal has one in the commercial.If Apple invested 100 million in Samsung...how much do you think they get the 15" LCD panels for?Don't you dare say $300.00 Think about it.Ponder....
post #19 of 28
[quote]Originally posted by Hornet:
<strong>IBM has always had substancially higher speed chips in the ready, merely held back by Apple's persistance of not having a higher clocked iMac than the top G4. Sad really.</strong><hr></blockquote>

yea, sure. you read to much AppleInsider
post #20 of 28
[quote]Originally posted by Renan:
<strong>It is business as usual at Apple with Jobs there.
Motorola has the fabrication and technology.Mr.
Jobs prefers a slower chip than truly necessary because he gets a better price.Care to guess how much Apple pays per chip per 1,000 or 10,000 Especially, when he has a monopoly on the chips.</strong><hr></blockquote> How does this relate to yields? If you want the faster chips, but they are a small part of the yield, then there is a premium. [quote]<strong>
That is why alot of people in the industry do not trust Steve Jobs..He lied in the past to Wozniak
his founding partner.It is called greed.And marketing,marketing , and more marketing.Like
Michael Jackson.A performance.We are in the year 2001 not 1975.The technology is there.</strong> <hr></blockquote>I get it now - because Steve is greedy, Apple won't use faster chips. This makes more money for Steve. [quote]<strong>Whether
it is for sale...business as usual.Horizontal and
vertical markets?Perhaps it is not a hardware war
but a software war instead.Hewlett-Packards 15"LCD,
CDRW/DVD 30Gig,256 Ram,Pentium 3 1.2 GHz and Windows 98 is not bad for $1,700.00 Maybe we hardcore Apple consumers need to chill and let Apple be until Sept. 2003 G-5 8500 1.8 Ghz
I will start saving now. Watch Apples stock drop...</strong><hr></blockquote>Shouldn't the stock go up? Steve and Apple charge so much for the systems.<strong> [quote]
Now they need patches for DVD or is it CDRW
on O/S-X? Like cabbage patch dolls does the new
iMac flat panel, G-3 maybe 1 GHz come with papers?Ground breaking consumer toy.By 2003 O/S X will have all the patches and kinks worked out.Awesome...By then you will also pay alot less
for the G-5 because AMD will be manufacturing it
for Apple.It will be cheaper and cost effective.</strong><hr></blockquote>But I thought Motorolla has the technology and fabrication capability, and if it weren't for Steve's greed, we'd be going so much faster? Won't Steve also be greedy with the AMD chips? He'll keep the fast ones for himself? [quote]<strong>
We all win.Ours hope wont be so high and we wont let down.With the ground breaking iPod.Seal has one in the commercial.If Apple invested 100 million in Samsung...how much do you think they get the 15" LCD panels for?Don't you dare say $300.00 Think about it.Ponder....</strong><hr></blockquote>

Apple is a $8 billion revenue business, Samsung is a $120 billion revenue business... I'm thinking about it....

I'm thinking you're looking for one person to blame for high prices and slow progression in clock speed. I don't think it's Steve Jobs. Ponder this - what if Gil was still in charge?

[ 12-23-2001: Message edited by: jwdawso ]</p>
-JD
-- "If Apple wasn't so greedy, they would build G6's and give them away!"
Reply
-JD
-- "If Apple wasn't so greedy, they would build G6's and give them away!"
Reply
post #21 of 28
[quote] It just came to me then. If apple release a G4 equiped iMac, say at 1000mhz.......


Will it ever go beyond 1.2ghz? <hr></blockquote>

So what? Apple could introduce a G4 iMac right now at 933 MHz. The Apollo is rumored to clock up to 1.233 GHz, so that leaves enough headroom for a year of CPU speed bumps for the iMac, with current technology. After a year, Moto will have scaled the Apollo even higher.

I don't believe that the G4 will be discontinued with the arrival of the G5. Rather, I see the two chips being developed in parallel, one for consumer computers, and one for pro computers. This leaves the G3 to be EOL, but it is an old chip, and ready to kick the bucket. IBM can fab extra G4s and G5s for Apple (they will probably have to because Moto sucks so hard).

If the iMac doesn't get a G4 by MWNY at the very latest, I will be surprised and very disapointed in Apple. It is time for Altivec to become widespread, so that developers will have incentive to code for it. Since Apple has optimized OS X for Altivec, this suggests that they are committed to it, but now Apple must prove to developers that they are committed to Altivec by USING Altivec in the majority of their product line, i.e., not just the high end market, but the larger consumer market.
post #22 of 28
[quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:
<strong>

So what? Apple could introduce a G4 iMac right now at 933 MHz. The Apollo is rumored to clock up to 1.233 GHz, so that leaves enough headroom for a year of CPU speed bumps for the iMac, with current technology. After a year, Moto will have scaled the Apollo even higher.

I don't believe that the G4 will be discontinued with the arrival of the G5. Rather, I see the two chips being developed in parallel, one for consumer computers, and one for pro computers. This leaves the G3 to be EOL, but it is an old chip, and ready to kick the bucket. IBM can fab extra G4s and G5s for Apple (they will probably have to because Moto sucks so hard).

If the iMac doesn't get a G4 by MWNY at the very latest, I will be surprised and very disapointed in Apple. It is time for Altivec to become widespread, so that developers will have incentive to code for it. Since Apple has optimized OS X for Altivec, this suggests that they are committed to it, but now Apple must prove to developers that they are committed to Altivec by USING Altivec in the majority of their product line, i.e., not just the high end market, but the larger consumer market.</strong><hr></blockquote>


the G3 won't go EOL anytime soon, neither will the G4.

Apple isn't their only customer. Hell, Motorola still makes 68K chips.
post #23 of 28
the major problem with the G4 in a consumer line is that newbies dont use final cut and photoshop, so who freakin cares about a g4, when g3 is cheaper?

C.pres
The brain conceives of mathematical space in terms of numbers and dimensions ... The hand masters matter through the crafts, and with the help of tools and machinery.
Reply
The brain conceives of mathematical space in terms of numbers and dimensions ... The hand masters matter through the crafts, and with the help of tools and machinery.
Reply
post #24 of 28
preston, you said something similar in another thread. I responded with the following:

[quote]Originally posted by preston:
<strong>Apple won't (or shouldn't) put a G4 in ANY consumer product. No average consumer uses photoshop, final cut PERIOD. Maybe I do, and you probably do too, but then I guess you should be looking for a pro model or a PC!

C.pres</strong><hr></blockquote>

That's just retarded. Sorry. Exactly what are iMacs good for then? You can only sell so many quite expensive iMacs to people who will only use them for e-mail and Word. Lots of average consumers use photoshop, and if not final cut, at least iMovie. Especially those inclined to buy macs in the first place. Just because someone isn't rich doesn't mean they don't use creativity apps. I know of a few people who use iMacs for just that purpose. They just can't afford a PowerMac. To tell someone in effect, "Well go buy a PC" because we don't offer anything for your needs is just stupid. It also explains Apple's market share. In the end you can only get so far with a computer for games and/or simpletons! PC's are better in both areas. Certainly, iMac money buys a much better gaming rig on the PC side. And, if I just need a simple computer for e-mail, web browsing, and word processing, then a $300 e-machines will do quite nicely. Say what you want about Windows, but the system will do those tasks well enough without crashing, and the consumer will find them easy enough to. NO NO NO! A mac, ANY mac, is unique and useful specifically because it's good at content creation. They ALL have to run PhotoShop, Dreamweaver, Quark, Bryce, iMovie, and the proCreate line (well), and even the consumer models have to at least run FCP (1.0-2.0), and Premier decently (for schools). Maya is the only thing that I can think will remain exclusively in the pro domain, for now.

Think before you flame. All of those Apps run decently on B&W G3 towers. Most of the current iMacs and iBooks are now faster than those Pro models (many of which are still in use in PRO environments). There are A LOT more people than you think making due with consumer machines. As are many institutions -- my former highschool just set up a photshop, digital art, 3-d lab with mostly iMacs (about 30) and a handfull of powermacs. Take away these users, and 'consumer' sales WON'T look quite so good any more!
____________________________

Also: granted that by my own admission a G4 isn't critical for even these tasks, provided a G3 can deliver the goods. But it is not a case that consumer macs don't (or don't need to) run these apps. They most certainly do. They are a major part of what makes the mac a mac.
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #25 of 28
ooops... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />

[ 12-24-2001: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #26 of 28
[quote]Apple invested 100 million in Samsung...how much do you think they get the 15" LCD panels for?Don't you dare say $300.00 Think about it.Ponder.... <hr></blockquote>


how many times are you people going to bring this up?? apple sold their investment in samsung about a year ago. also, if you follow the rumors, apple is getting the lcd's from somone different, some manufacturer in taiwan, if im not mistaken

[edit: damn sticky A key.....]

[ 12-24-2001: Message edited by: ThunderPoit ]</p>
ThunderPoit: ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US! YOU HAVE NO CHANCE TO SURVIVE MAKE YOUR TIME!

savi: DONOT MOCK SADAMS WORDS!
Reply
ThunderPoit: ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US! YOU HAVE NO CHANCE TO SURVIVE MAKE YOUR TIME!

savi: DONOT MOCK SADAMS WORDS!
Reply
post #27 of 28
Thunderpoit wrote:
"some manufacturer in tiwan, if im not mistaken"


I agree, the TiBook is a nice product, but such a rename of Taiwan would be too much honour
post #28 of 28
[quote]Originally posted by applenut:

Quote:
Originally posted by Hornet:
IBM has always had substancially higher speed chips in the ready, merely held back by Apple's persistance of not having a higher clocked iMac than the top G4. Sad really.<hr></blockquote>

yea, sure. you read to much AppleInsider

Exactement. I think some people's lives revolve around the internet (not me, of course), and What's Written on the Web is more sacred than the Ten Commandments Written by the Finger of God, whether it's verifiable or not.

NEW RULE: Anybody stating a fact (please look this word up) has to back it up with a URL, quote, pdf, doctor's note, etc. Motorola marketing material is automatically unsubmittable.

Edit: can't spell "quote," apparently.

[ 12-27-2001: Message edited by: GardenOfEarthlyDelights ]</p>
Die Grüne Hölle - Gute Fahrt
Reply
Die Grüne Hölle - Gute Fahrt
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › G4 iMac - are we missing the MAJOR problem with this?