Motorola confirms Apollo for early 2002
December 4, 2001 9:10AM
Future Apple Hardware
edited January 2014
Reply 1 of 52
December 4, 2001 9:18AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Motorola wait to officially announce the original G4 until Apple announced it in the PowerMacs? This could be the same situation with the G5. I can see Moto and IBM announcing details on CPU upgrades (like 7410-7450-7460, and the 750-750CXe, etc.) but an ENTIRELY new generation of CPU, like the G5 would probably be kept under wraps, especially since Apple has been developing a lot of it in-house for their PowerMacs.
Reply 2 of 52
December 4, 2001 9:21AM
This is pretty bad news if correct (and it seems correct). It says Apollo will NOT be manufactured using .13 SOI, but .18 SOI... We'll be lucky to get 1GHz out of this Expo. And it looks like the G5 isn't even close to being released for desktops.
Reply 3 of 52
December 4, 2001 9:35AM
Ahhh. All the naysayers of doom and gloom. I'm willing to bet 64MB RAM on GHz mac at the expo....Any takers?
Reply 4 of 52
December 4, 2001 9:45AM
Oh, there'll be a ghz G4 at the top of the pile. Maybe even a dual. And the whole hoopla will be that it breaks the ghz barrier. No 1.2, 1.4, 1.6 like everyone's hoping, though.
Reply 5 of 52
December 4, 2001 10:14AM
Steve must be all over Motorola like a rash.
I think its clear: GHz G3 LCD iMacs & GHz G4 Quicksilvers at SanFran + iPod enhancements (the fabled iPhoto?)
No G5's til New York and 10.2
Reply 6 of 52
December 4, 2001 10:21AM
Maybe steve wanted this leaked out, or announced as it were, so calm the mad speculation on the g5s that they cant deliver on for mwsf.
Reply 7 of 52
December 4, 2001 10:26AM
Weren't the Apollos also designed with, i don't know, laptops in mind?
Then it makes perfect sense for moto to be announcing Apollo. It will be in the next-gen TiBook. Also, IBM has announced the next-gen G3, which would go very nicely in the next-gen ibook.
Reply 8 of 52
December 4, 2001 10:45AM
Nowhere does Motorola DENY that a G5 will debut. Only that a 7460 'Apollo' G4 is scheduled to debut soon.
Reply 9 of 52
December 4, 2001 11:01AM
Wasn't one of the supposed advantages of going to a .13µ process, to greatly reduce the amount of heat produced by the chips? If so, then staying at a .18µ process might point to these chips being used for desktop Macs after all, no?
Reply 10 of 52
bozo the clown
December 4, 2001 11:07AM
The fact that Motorola announced this chip (whose specs we've known for quite some time) tell us NOTHING about the status of the G5.
The G5 is still a possibility, but appears to be a longshot at this point.
Reply 11 of 52
December 4, 2001 1:12PM
What we really need right now it is a new Mobo with DDR and a faster bus...
I do not think that it is unreasonnable expectations........
Reply 12 of 52
December 4, 2001 1:38PM
About that line saying Apollo is on .18 SOI.
I have two guess as to the meaning of that statement:
1. It could be an error, and they meant .13.
Or, more interesting:
2. It could be that they've decided to save their more advanced manufacturing process for the G5 rather than the G4.
If that's the case, then some of the opinions that the G5=Apollo are actually half true. They decided to move the .13 process over to the G5, saving more of the good stuff for that chip.
That might also explain why some of the Mhz predictions for Apollo aren't as high as expected. That MacWorld UK interview with someone at Motorola said the G4 would top out around 1Ghz. That number should be higher if they're using the smaller manufacturing process.
Sounds to me like the Apollo will not be a laptop chip after all. Unless that .18 number is an error, that is.
Reply 13 of 52
December 4, 2001 1:42PM
[quote]Originally posted by AppleCello:
<strong>Maybe steve wanted this leaked out, or announced as it were, so calm the mad speculation on the g5s that they cant deliver on for mwsf.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I would not doubt that leaking this was an Apple idea. . <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
It's better to leak something of the truth than get boo'd at a keynote because of someone's line of BS in a chat room, or just false rumor spreading is a totaly inacurate, and an unobtainable goal to meet in the real world.
I said it the first time I read it. "It (G5's coming soon) looks a BS story to me". Why anybody would believe that to begin with is still puzzling to me. I thought everybody knew that Apolo was the next fabm coming from Motorola for us.
It's still going to be an awesome MacWorld. I love new product announcements.
Reply 14 of 52
December 4, 2001 2:06PM
I really thought the G4 Apollo would be manufactured using HiP7(0.13 AND SOI).....bummer.
After all they've been using this process since April, manufacturing cores to embedded processors, @ least that is what this press release states.
currently running embedded microprocessor cores on this advanced 0.13 micron process.
Production is expected to begin in second quarter of this year in MOS13, Motorola's most advanced 8-inch facility in Austin, Texas. With the completion of this new process, Motorola continues to be an industry leader in copper process capabilities, building on the successes of two previous generations."
Well @ least I can hope for DDRsdram. Oh great googly moogly
Reply 15 of 52
December 4, 2001 2:14PM
Here is my take on the reasoning behind this story. I highly doubt that Steve is all over Motorola. I believe Steve was directly involved in this. Apple took a beating in the press and by the mac faithful after MWNY...a SEVERE beating. Why? So many rumors and expectations were way too high. The G5 may not be ready and this is Apple's indirect way of cooling rumors a little that have a negative effect on the show. The iMac rumors are probably welcomes by Apple, the create excitement for the brand and they create excitement on the trading floor. Just look at the pre-Seybold press release. No new hardware...direct from Steve Jobs. They learned from the MWNY debacle and are trying to keep it from happening again.
Reply 16 of 52
December 4, 2001 2:17PM
I'm starting to think it was a typo and they meant to say .13. It would be odd that they would make all that effort just to go to SOI.
Reply 17 of 52
December 4, 2001 2:23PM
[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:
<strong>I'm starting to think it was a typo and they meant to say .13. It would be odd that they would make all that effort just to go to SOI.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It has to be a typo. Isn''t it? . I thought my 867 was on a .015, or whatever.
Reply 18 of 52
December 4, 2001 2:39PM
After reading it, I had the same thought regarding the .18µ SOI thing (typo)...MacCentral has been known to jumble their facts and numbers from time to time. Anyone who understands the hardware issues care to email them and ask them to double-check? They've printed corrections many times before....
Also, just so I understand...does a chip made from the more advanced process result in a cooler chip? Or am I getting my facts mixed up too? I don't keep track of this stuff too closely as it results in brain-cramps every six months or so after the MW Expos don't pan out accordingly.
Hey Rickag...can I use "oh great googly moogly" as my signature?
Reply 19 of 52
December 4, 2001 2:53PM
great googly moogly isn't mine. I stole it from a commercial(and it isn't part of my signature)
Reply 20 of 52
December 4, 2001 2:54PM
[quote]Originally posted by Slacker:
<strong>Ahhh. All the naysayers of doom and gloom. I'm willing to bet 64MB RAM on GHz mac at the expo....Any takers?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have a 64 MB iBook chip that I'm not using. Um, I don't know why I said that. I'm not giving it to you.