or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › PowerBook G5
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

PowerBook G5 - Page 7  

post #241 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by dfryer
Saying that people will have to change their apps is all well and good, but would anyone spend money on a product whose performance depends on app developers switching to a new paradigm?

That's the thing. This design is the future, but Apple may not have the luxury of continuing along their current path. Look at the introduction of the dual processor G4s (in fact the introduction of the G4 in the first place). Apple had no other choice.

Quote:
Originally posted by dfryer
Switching from SMP-style multithreading to an MPI-style multiple-process model is probably not trivial for most applications.

The great thing about MPI is that it can be done gradually. You can slowly port an entire application to MPI, you don't have to do it all at once (unlike say, porting an application to Carbon).

Quote:
Originally posted by dfryer
I see few advantages to MPI as opposed to NUMA SMP, unless we're talking about completely separate address spaces (i.e. separate machines networked together) We will probably see a MPI API push by apple (for people who want their apps to be clusterable) before we see cluster-on-a-board computers.

Again, what if Apple doesn't have a choice in this? What if the (standard) G4 has topped out at 1.3GHz, and by the time Crolles has ramped up, Motorola no longer cares about the G4? And you answered your own question.

That said, I do have problems with much of what Nr9 is saying, specifically about the inflexibility of the design. I would be shocked if there was any incompatibility with current applications, including the inability to gain performance from multithreading applications. But Cell-style architecture is the future. Even if it doesn't appear next year, it will appear in future Macs.

Barto
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
post #242 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by wizard69
It is not a question of ignoring your arguments, the problem is that your arguments are invalid and apparently not based on contemporary knowledge in the field.

My arguments are invalid are they? Not based on contemporary knowledge are they?

Dark side blinded you to reason, it has. Argue with you I will not.
Quote:
The point is that you have been arguing that the described technology is impossible because a new instruction set is required or new hardware is required or a new operating system is required. Clusters in general and the PPC cluster in particular, should demonstrate clearly that it is possible to implement the discussed technology WITHOUT the need for instruction set modifications or special processors.

Aside from the fact that you don't seem to understand the difference between the impossible and the merely unreasonably difficult, this assertion proves that you have a fundamental lack of understanding of what HPC is about.
Quote:
So At least we agree that the nodes are capable of running conventional code while being part of a cluster.

I said they could. That's not the point. You're arguing at cross purposes here because you really don't know what you're talking about. (About clustering, that is. You may know a lot about other things you talk about.)
Quote:
I do know a couple of things though. One is that Apple will have hard time stuffing a 970 into a laptop even with a die shrink. The second is that Apple is probally in the best position of any company, in the computing business, to be able to successfully launch such a machine. This is largely a result of previous efforts to support the G4 in dual processor configurations.

You don't know as much as you think you do. And as long as you continue to believe you know as much as you think you do, you never will.

If the current rumors on AI are correct about the PPC970+, we may well see 1.8 - 2.0GHz G5 Powerbooks this summer. What with SSOI and Power Tune, this could the "low energy" chip rumored to be in the works.
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
post #243 of 376
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
You don't know as much as you think you do. And as long as you continue to believe you know as much as you think you do, you never will.

you should talk in the mirror
post #244 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
you should talk in the mirror

Hey, I'm willing to be educated. Show me something. So far you all I've seen from you is the insistance that STI are really just building a cluster and Apple is building a cluster in a laptop because a chip you haven't seen yet is going to be bad at power management.

Now, if in my ignorance, I have some part of that wrong please enlighten me.
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
post #245 of 376
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
Hey, I'm willing to be educated. Show me something. So far you all I've seen from you is the insistance that STI are really just building a cluster and Apple is building a cluster in a laptop because a chip you haven't seen yet is going to be bad at power management.

Now, if in my ignorance, I have some part of that wrong please enlighten me.

something you should know, is that comments like

You don't know as much as you think you do. And as long as you continue to believe you know as much as you think you do, you never will.

in response to:

I do know a couple of things though. One is that Apple will have hard time stuffing a 970 into a laptop even with a die shrink. The second is that Apple is probally in the best position of any company, in the computing business, to be able to successfully launch such a machine. This is largely a result of previous efforts to support the G4 in dual processor configurations

are neither constructive nor accurate.

a rumor is a rumor. you dont dispel another rumor using another rumor as proof.
post #246 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
Dark side blinded you to reason, it has. Argue with you I will not.

Urge to make Voltaire quote rising...

Barto
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
post #247 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
a rumor is a rumor. you dont dispel another rumor using another rumor as proof.

That's funny coming from someone who accused IBM of lying about technology in their next processor.

It's common sense. Which do you think is more likely to be in the next Powerbook G5, a slimmed down, power saving PPC970 or a 4 CPU cluster with as many transistors as a PPC970?

Oh, wait, forget I asked. I think I know what your answer will be and it will have nothing to do with common sense.
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
post #248 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown

I said they could. That's not the point. You're arguing at cross purposes here because you really don't know what you're talking about. (About clustering, that is. You may know a lot about other things you talk about.)



My point with respect to clustering, is that a cluster can be built out of common hardware. These clusters can be built at the board level like VT does or similarly on a MCM. SOC just provides another scaling factor. New hardware instructions and massive rewrites to the operating system are not required.
Quote:



If the current rumors on AI are correct about the PPC970+, we may well see 1.8 - 2.0GHz G5 Powerbooks this summer. What with SSOI and Power Tune, this could the "low energy" chip rumored to be in the works.

I would absolutely love to hear in feburary that the 970+, along with its support chips, are running with low enough power disipation to go into a laptop. That would be just fantastic. On the other hand I'm not too sure that IBM is going to be able to cut power usage by 50%. Even if they hit 50% it would still be a rather power hungery machine relative to what else is possible.
Quote:

post #249 of 376
I really hope nr9 is right. I'm an EE and I would love to have a powerbook with a processor that's actually a revolutionary development. Whether it's real or not, I think this rumor is damn cool.
Cat: the other white meat
Cat: the other white meat
post #250 of 376
Yeah the thought is really cool, it certianly would be good if Apple where to introduce really low power technology into a laptop. For a laptop in would be revolutionary, but in the past attempts that somewhat mimic what is being described where done on the PC.

I wonder if anybody remembers the Transputer? What has been described is something like a Transputer but with fewer porcessors of the same family as the control processor. With a bit of modernization it would be really cool. Especially if they can map some of the current operating system functionality onto the implementation.

Dave



Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
I really hope nr9 is right. I'm an EE and I would love to have a powerbook with a processor that's actually a revolutionary development. Whether it's real or not, I think this rumor is damn cool.
post #251 of 376
I believe Tomb is right about the G5 PowerBook. IBM is doing an energy saving G5 and will be talking about it in February if my memory is correct. It's possible that this chip is not just for Apple. IBM may see a big benefit to significantly lower power for its blade servers too. If there is not excessive overhead, power conservation is a good thing for any application.

Yet the cell appears to have a great deal of promise. If Sony is pursuing the cell for PlayStation 3, it is surely way beyond a 'blue sky' idea. They have it working, at least in prototype stage. Since the PlayStation is a low cost consumer product, the cell must have potential for low cost as well as a high performance at low power. So it should not be surprising to hear that Apple is working on the same thing. But realistically, at what stage is Apple in producing a product?

My bet is that Apple will not beat Sony to market with cell technology. If this rumor is true about a four core processor using message passing, it is very likely a prototype chip for prototype computers. There would be a tremendous amount of software experimentation and testing to do on a new concept like this. Apple would have to get hundreds of these boxes in the hands of their own software engineers as well as a few key vendors.

It would be foolish to come out with such a revolutionary product quickly. When does Sony plan to introduce the PS/3? This would be the very earliest date that Apple could have a product. Likely it would be longer. If after a lot of experimentation and testing Apple finds cell technology does not offer some significant advantage, then it may never see the light of day.
post #252 of 376
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
That's funny coming from someone who accused IBM of lying about technology in their next processor.

It's common sense. Which do you think is more likely to be in the next Powerbook G5, a slimmed down, power saving PPC970 or a 4 CPU cluster with as many transistors as a PPC970?

Oh, wait, forget I asked. I think I know what your answer will be and it will have nothing to do with common sense.

i enjoy the luxury of making such comments because I have sources. you don't. you are just speculating
post #253 of 376
My mom's prettier than your mom!
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
post #254 of 376
I just want to add a final thought to my last posting.

I believe there is a very good chance that the cell type processor will make it into Apple products eventually. However, the last statement in my posting could also be true. After testing prototype computers built on the cell approach, and comparing results with present architectures, it's possible that the cell has no significant advantage in any market. It's just an engineering fact of life. Ideas that look great on paper, that people get all excited about, these ideas don't always pan out the way we hope. Win some, lose some.

Just because a cluster of high powered computers can do wondrous things, it is not assured that a cluster of low power processors will do great things in an individual computer. When it's broken down to the smallest element in the mix, there may be no substitute for raw power in individual processor cores.
post #255 of 376
The PowerBook are great. They are really fast what-so-ever. No G5 soon. G4s are perfect. 8)
Why be trapped behind Windows and Gates when you can live freely with a Mac.

Macs:
PowerMac G5 Quad
4 2.5Ghz PowerPC G5 Cores
1GB RAM (will be more soon)
nVidia GeForce 7800 GT Graphics Card
2x500G...
Why be trapped behind Windows and Gates when you can live freely with a Mac.

Macs:
PowerMac G5 Quad
4 2.5Ghz PowerPC G5 Cores
1GB RAM (will be more soon)
nVidia GeForce 7800 GT Graphics Card
2x500G...
post #256 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
i enjoy the luxury of making such comments because I have sources. you don't. you are just speculating

what a bunch of BS, this guy is a classic ignoramous troll
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
post #257 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by Agent Macintosh
The PowerBook are great. They are really fast what-so-ever. No G5 soon. G4s are perfect. 8)

It seems to me like the aluminum PowerBook is a design Apple is going to use temporarily -- a stop gap to the Next Big Thing.

I have heard from a few people and read online that manufacturing the Titanium PowerBook was wasteful and costly.

Apple knew from its ongoing work on the G5 that it was going to have a unique thermal zone design, with an aluminum enclosure. I believe that Apple decided to bring things into parity with the PowerBooks by altering a design already in use with the iBooks, as a stop-gap measure.

I mean, look at the aluminum PowerBook's keyboard -- it has the same font style as is on the iBook! Not that this is the sole indicator that the design of the iBook was lifted for the PowerBook, but I think that even the fact that the iBook team built the 12-inch PowerBook is telling.

The timing of the announcement of new PowerBooks last winter at MWSF seemed rather odd, given the release of the Titanium, only two months previously.

The whole thing seems kind of transitionary, if you ask me. Maybe I'm just in a strange funk
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
post #258 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by DHagan4755


The whole thing seems kind of transitionary, if you ask me. Maybe I'm just in a strange funk

pretty sure that's the case, especially after that 20 inch powerbook thread
post #259 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by DHagan4755
It seems to me like the aluminum PowerBook is a design Apple is going to use temporarily -- a stop gap to the Next Big Thing.

I think it was a concession, after years of trying, that titanium was just an all-around bad idea as a laptop shell. If we've learned anything over the last few years, it's that Apple has crack materials and electrical engineers, and they flailed around more with the TiBook than with any other model I've ever seen come out of Cupertino - including the Cube.

Aluminum is significantly cheaper and much, much easier to work with, and it allowed them to keep the original design - which, despite all its foibles, is probably the most successful since the WallStreet inspired comparisons to Jayne Mansfield.

Quote:
Apple knew from its ongoing work on the G5 that it was going to have a unique thermal zone design, with an aluminum enclosure. I believe that Apple decided to bring things into parity with the PowerBooks by altering a design already in use with the iBooks, as a stop-gap measure.

I mean, look at the aluminum PowerBook's keyboard -- it has the same font style as is on the iBook! Not that this is the sole indicator that the design of the iBook was lifted for the PowerBook, but I think that even the fact that the iBook team built the 12-inch PowerBook is telling.

There aren't really hardware teams within Apple. Apple Executive has clarified that. That said, it's not at all surprising that the 12" PowerBook borrows liberally from the 12" iBook. Why shouldn't it? It's a lot easier than trying to scale a bigger but still cramped motherboard down.

I wonder whether, in fact, the aluminum PowerBooks informed the G5 case, or whether Ives realized that it was better for both, or something like that. At any rate, now that the G5 is aluminum as well, I can see the general style sticking around for a while.

I don't think it's possible to partition a laptop in the way that the G5 (or a rackmount server) is partitioned. It's just too tight in there, and the roar of an Xserve is not acceptable to the average laptop user. You'll continue to see a lot more pipes wicking heat around to radiators, and a lot more strategies adapted to the fact that everything is stacked on top of everything else and there's hardly any room to circulate air.

The WallStreet reminds me: Maybe Apple should go back to stainless steel, only this time without the WallStreet's plastic covering. That would be badass.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
post #260 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by DHagan4755
It seems to me like the aluminum PowerBook is a design Apple is going to use temporarily -- a stop gap to the Next Big Thing.


So the question is what is the next big thing? Dual G4s, a low power 970, a new processor follow on to the 750 series or something really new as this thread has suggested.

At this point I have a hard time believing that Apple and IBM are going to get a high enough power reduction in the 970 series to enable placement in the PowerBook. Another go around with the G4 is possible either with or without SMP, but I don't think Apple really want that. So that leave a new processor which by the way seems to have its own rumors or a multiprocessor as described here in this thread.
Quote:
>>>>>>>>>>snipped

The whole thing seems kind of transitionary, if you ask me. Maybe I'm just in a strange funk

Strangenest is the PowerBooks life this year. What it will morph into is an open question. It would be nice if there was actually solid evidence that the 970 can be reimplemented in a low power device at a marketable frequency. Since there is no evidence of this vry low power 970 your funk is justified.

It would be a sad day for Apple if the tried to deliever to us 1.2 or 1.4 GHz 970's as laptop machines. A more substantial performance increase is need in the laptop arena. Beyond that Apple needs to win back its low power leadership.

Dave

Quote:

post #261 of 376
Aluminum cases are the "hottest" cases in the hobbyist community. Everyone wants one. Form their lightness to their heat dissipation properties to their nice sheen. Apple embraced the hobbyist community when they release the PowerMac G5 and now has the leading Case design with the awesome heat zones.

The Titanium Notebooks were the most lusted after notebooks and the Aluminum improve on their design, only now there is no paint chipping problem. They are beautiful notebooks. But, Apple is getting some heat as the Pentium-M is starting to really put some pressure on, though the Powerbooks are still superior, imo, it is getting to close to be comfortable. I don't think Apple wants to go through a repeat of the desktop marketshare losses. And, why should they? They have excellent notebooks across the price range.

They only now need to differentiate the Powerbooks by moving them forward into the 970 world and the sooner the better. The iBooks then can get faster with the 7447 and its lower heat and lead on the low-end, while the Powerbooks catapult forward into 970 speeds.
post #262 of 376
Hi Stinger;

While I have to agree that the P-M is a serious threat Apple will not be able to meet that challenge with the 970 unless they can get an extrodinary power reduction.

64 bit can be a very marketable feature in a laptop there is no doubt about that, but if Apple loose the other features they are famous for then it won't clinch any sales. Apple has to move forward on battry time considerations, even if they have to adopt larger batteries or new technologies. Thats with todays G4, going to the 970 will only make it worst.

What it comes down to is that any cooling technologies that they add to the machine only permit the machine to discharge the batteries faster. Heat is current and wasted power at that. So form my perspective there is limited use for fancy cooling technologies in portables. All these technologies point out is that the machine is burning up your batter reserves.

Now I'd jump for joy if the 970+ or the 980 came out and disipated only 5 to 10 watts at 2GHz, but I think that is a stretch. But hey time is short we are bound to see somthing differrent in a few months.


Thanks
Dave



Quote:
Originally posted by stingerman
Aluminum cases are the "hottest" cases in the hobbyist community. Everyone wants one. Form their lightness to their heat dissipation properties to their nice sheen. Apple embraced the hobbyist community when they release the PowerMac G5 and now has the leading Case design with the awesome heat zones.

The Titanium Notebooks were the most lusted after notebooks and the Aluminum improve on their design, only now there is no paint chipping problem. They are beautiful notebooks. But, Apple is getting some heat as the Pentium-M is starting to really put some pressure on, though the Powerbooks are still superior, imo, it is getting to close to be comfortable. I don't think Apple wants to go through a repeat of the desktop marketshare losses. And, why should they? They have excellent notebooks across the price range.

They only now need to differentiate the Powerbooks by moving them forward into the 970 world and the sooner the better. The iBooks then can get faster with the 7447 and its lower heat and lead on the low-end, while the Powerbooks catapult forward into 970 speeds.
post #263 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by wizard69
Hi Stinger;

While I have to agree that the P-M is a serious threat Apple will not be able to meet that challenge with the 970 unless they can get an extrodinary power reduction.

The P-M isn't that efficient. It's just much more efficient than the P4-M, and it has much better performance per clock.

It still isn't up to the 7457, and really Mot wouldn't need to do much to turn the '57 into something that eats the P-M for lunch. Of course, this is Motorola, so who knows whether they will?

Quote:
What it comes down to is that any cooling technologies that they add to the machine only permit the machine to discharge the batteries faster. Heat is current and wasted power at that. So form my perspective there is limited use for fancy cooling technologies in portables. All these technologies point out is that the machine is burning up your batter reserves.

Not following. Except for fans, all the technologies Apple has used in PowerBooks to date are passive, including any liquid cooling. Power consumption isn't an issue.

Quote:
Now I'd jump for joy if the 970+ or the 980 came out and disipated only 5 to 10 watts at 2GHz, but I think that is a stretch. But hey time is short we are bound to see somthing differrent in a few months.

5-10 Watts is unnecessarily low. Intel is coy about actual typical/maximum wattage with the Pentium M, but they say to design solutions around the 1.7GHz Pentium M as if it were a 24.5W part (noting that it can go higher). This is the same number offered for the top few clock speeds. The 7457 at 1.267GHz has a typical power consumption of 18.3W, and a max of 25.6 (up from 15.8W and 22.0W, respectively, at 1GHz). The 7447 should be a bit more economical, given that it's a bit smaller. So if Apple can get something into the 20-25W range, they're good to go.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
post #264 of 376
so what are the chances that the PBs will see a new form factor this January? 'Slim' considering there is supposed to be a new form factor for the displays...

or maybe there will be DP PBs with only a moderate change in form factor...

perhaps not...
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\]]]]]]]]]]]]]
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\]]]]]]]]]]]]]
post #265 of 376
I'm honestly not expecting much of anything this January. Yeah, we got surprised last time, but two years in a row?

If there is an update, it'll have to be a surprise, because the 90nm G5 isn't due until Feb/March and any CPU Mot is offering to replace the 7457 has been kept utterly secret.

A DP PowerBook would almost have to be a dual-core design, which means that Motorola would have to come through with it at 90nm (IBM has nothing that would work in a PowerBook in a dual-core configuration). It's also possible that IBM has some all-new thing to offer that nobody's heard about. The tech predicted in this thread, or something like it, wouldn't appear until about this time next year if it appeared at all (which is an open question).

I'd say, however, that we'll see a PowerBook refresh on the usual 6-9 month schedule.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
post #266 of 376
I think the G4 iBook was a cue that something new is coming. What? I don't know.
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
post #267 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by Amorph
5-10 Watts is unnecessarily low. Intel is coy about actual typical/maximum wattage with the Pentium M, but they say to design solutions around the 1.7GHz Pentium M as if it were a 24.5W part (noting that it can go higher). This is the same number offered for the top few clock speeds. The 7457 at 1.267GHz has a typical power consumption of 18.3W, and a max of 25.6 (up from 15.8W and 22.0W, respectively, at 1GHz). The 7447 should be a bit more economical, given that it's a bit smaller. So if Apple can get something into the 20-25W range, they're good to go.

Also it's important to remember that there's something of a Mhz myth as far as heat vs max wattage goes. If you can implement technologies that reduce leakage (for instance), you can reduce heat dissapation without affecting (or reducing) wattage. The rumored SSOI in the rumored 90nm PPC970 should reduce leakage by 15%. That translates to at least a 10% better heat profile at the same wattage.

So yeah, Apple could be about to announce a G5 laptop. If the wind is right, and the rumors are on target.
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
post #268 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
Also it's important to remember that there's something of a Mhz myth as far as heat vs max wattage goes. If you can implement technologies that reduce leakage (for instance), you can reduce heat dissapation without affecting (or reducing) wattage. . .


I think your point is that leakage current is wasted energy. It does not contribute to the processor's function. Yet, it is still part of the processors power profile, which is supply voltage multiplied by its input current. If you reduce leakage, you reduce input current and therefore reduce wattage.
post #269 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy
I think your point is that leakage current is wasted energy. It does not contribute to the processor's function. Yet, it is still part of the processors power profile, which is supply voltage multiplied by its input current. If you reduce leakage, you reduce input current and therefore reduce wattage.

Good point, fuzzy thinking on my part. But reducing leakage still reduces the heat generated when the part is drawing max wattage so there the end result is similar. But you're right in that it also reduces max wattage, which has the happy benefit of preserving battery life.
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
"Spec" is short for "specification" not "speculation".
post #270 of 376
OK OK, so when will the "rumors" harden so that we have a "real" picture of the next 2-3 months. I plan on getting a PB15 for christmas, i'll delay as much as possible, but should i return to this forum dec15th or jan15th????
"hard" as possible data please.
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
post #271 of 376
Does anyone know what the process is in designing a Powerbook?

You would think the recent Aluminum re-design must have taken in consideration future chips (i.e. G5) going in there.

Surely they wouldn't go to the cost of another enclosure so quickly...so either it can or they won't for quite a while.
post #272 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by Amorph
I'm honestly not expecting much of anything this January. Yeah, we got surprised last time, but two years in a row?

If there is an update, it'll have to be a surprise, because the 90nm G5 isn't due until Feb/March and any CPU Mot is offering to replace the 7457 has been kept utterly secret.

A DP PowerBook would almost have to be a dual-core design, which means that Motorola would have to come through with it at 90nm (IBM has nothing that would work in a PowerBook in a dual-core configuration). It's also possible that IBM has some all-new thing to offer that nobody's heard about. The tech predicted in this thread, or something like it, wouldn't appear until about this time next year if it appeared at all (which is an open question).

I'd say, however, that we'll see a PowerBook refresh on the usual 6-9 month schedule.

Well, why not announce iMac G5's or PB G5's. Announce. Shipping March.
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
post #273 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by satchmo
Surely they wouldn't go to the cost of another enclosure so quickly...so either it can or they won't for quite a while.

Well the point I was trying to make earlier, was that the aluminum design currently used for the PowerBooks was a temporary design borrowed from the iBooks, while another design more suited to that of a PowerBook G5 is still being tweaked so the G5 works right.
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
post #274 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by NOFEER
OK OK, so when will the "rumors" harden so that we have a "real" picture of the next 2-3 months. I plan on getting a PB15 for christmas, i'll delay as much as possible, but should i return to this forum dec15th or jan15th????
"hard" as possible data please.

Save yourself the anxiety. Get the 15" machine.

There's no telling when or whether the rumors will harden. I don't believe anyone called the last MWSF PowerBook revision until the 11th hour, and then there was widespread skepticism because Apple had only just updated the line.

If you get the 15", you'll have it. It's a great machine, especially now that Apple appears to have licked the problems the first models were having.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
post #275 of 376
I don't think cell means cluster. I believe it is referring to a non-von Neuman architecture processor where Software is compiled into "circuits" that allows for significantly greater parallelism than current instruction level parallelism allows. That is that instructions are mapped to transistors in a more advanced form of reconfigurable computing. Software would need to be re-compiled in order to benefit. And even formerly single-threaded sequential code will benefit since this new approach allows code that could not be made parallel under the Von Neuman architecture to be parallelized under this new Cell approach. So this isn't just adding additional scalar units and wiring them together in ever faster ways. Nor is it limited to certain algorithms that take advantage of SIMD, since a lot of algorthms can't be vectorized.
post #276 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by Amorph
Save yourself the anxiety. Get the 15" machine.

There's no telling when or whether the rumors will harden. I don't believe anyone called the last MWSF PowerBook revision until the 11th hour, and then there was widespread skepticism because Apple had only just updated the line.

If you get the 15", you'll have it. It's a great machine, especially now that Apple appears to have licked the problems the first models were having.

thanks--i'll buy before christmas--now to find the best deal/bundle.
You make sense, now what about getting applecare(PB &iPod), is it worth it, and when can you get it. do you have to buy it at the time of purchase (including 3rd parties e.g. macmall etc) or can you wait after purchase or within the first 3months?
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
post #277 of 376
This is getting off topic: Purchasing advice goes in General Discussion, and I'm not moving this whole thread there.

You can look up AppleCare at Apple.com.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
post #278 of 376
well back to the topic...

I think the PB line will be refreshed sooner (Jan.), than later...perhaps to increase the gap between the currently strong iBook line...

possibly to make room for a G5 PB in the spring...???

perhaps not...
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\]]]]]]]]]]]]]
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\]]]]]]]]]]]]]
post #279 of 376
Quote:
Originally posted by stingerman
I don't think cell means cluster. I believe it is referring to a non-von Neuman architecture processor where Software is compiled into "circuits" that allows for significantly greater parallelism than current instruction level parallelism allows. That is that instructions are mapped to transistors in a more advanced form of reconfigurable computing. . .


This sounds very interesting, but some of us don't have any idea how it would work. Do you have a simple overview of the difference and an example of how it permits parallel code, which can not be parallel in conventional architecture?

Would it use the PPC instruction set, and would old code run, though not efficiently? How does this impact the original claim that there is a multicore chip where each core runs some Mach microkernel?

A link would be fine if it is not too deep, technically.
post #280 of 376
Thread Starter 
xgrid.. hint hint
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › PowerBook G5