UMA is very real. It has existed since the first iBook. It's not really a set feature set. it's more like the sahring of components to the best of Apple's abilities. The Cube was also based on UMA. In fact it was pretty much a powermac g4 board broken into pieces.
If you look at the developer docs you'll see that the latest revs of all the machines include an updated architecture that all share many of the same things. Most notably the Pangea chip.
I just think people are wrong when they say Apple is planning UMA2 or whatever like that. UMA seems to just be sharing components across lines. not really a set in stone revision based thing</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is the current iMac's chip based on UMA? It's only one board so I'm thinking no, but does it have something from the PMG4 or PBG4 melted into it? (not literally.)
Is the current iMac's chip based on UMA? It's only one board so I'm thinking no, but does it have something from the PMG4 or PBG4 melted into it? (not literally.)</strong><hr></blockquote>
sure. but its things that don't really matter much to us. like ICs and such.
if you look at the block diagrams you'll see that nearly all the machines are the same except for stuff added on like PCI slots or faster buses and AGP slots, etc.
<strong>sure. but its things that don't really matter much to us. like ICs and such.
if you look at the block diagrams you'll see that nearly all the machines are the same except for stuff added on like PCI slots or faster buses and AGP slots, etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, actually the major components only seem to be shared across the consumer and pro lines, respectively. That is, the iMac and iBook have the unified Pangea system controller, whereas the PowerMac and PowerBook (and formerly the Cube) feature a more classical Northbridge-Southbridge setup (Uni-N and KeyLargo).
"UMA seems to just be sharing components across lines. not really a set in stone revision based thing"
Exactly my point: does Apple want to have a consolidated shared line of core components? Yes, but there is no hardwired spec, and certainly no version 2 at this point. Please, most of the UMA talk has centered around UMA 1.5, which was a way for us to say that the components are neither UMA 1 or UMA 2. So, yes, I say it doesn't exist anymore because if it is just a philosophy of trying to use the same components as frequently as possibly, it's not an architecture nomenclature.
I wish I'd been first in the queue to shut this (original) guy up!
1. NO SUCH THING AS LAPTOP DDR RAM.
2. 800Mhz G4 will be included in the next PB - fact - they're out their with test corps.
3. IBM is not shipping sufficient 60Gb travelstars, not enough for their own channel needs, now the 48Gb's are in full supply, what do you want? a great laptop you can buy or a (slightly) better one you can't?
4. The GForce2Go currently requires too much power, Apple will not put this version in a laptop, there will be a v1.1/1.5 version that sorts (some) of that out in May/June, they'll have that. Apple will not be pursuing the Radeon line further.
5. Apple sold their stake in Samsung in Oct 2001, they no longer have any control of LCDs, preferencial prices yes, but no control. The yield ratio on the PB 1152s is still too low, as are the 1280 4:3's that everybody else uses. 1600 LCDs in that size would be prohibitively expensive and will remain so for 24-30 months and will would draw too much power.
Let me get this straight, you want a 1Ghz+ G4, with a 82Gb drive (which are being announced 2nd week of May), with 2Gb of made-up-laptop-DDR (or would you prefer Rambus?), probably USB2, Gigawire, why not go for an STM-64 interface, oh and 1920 LCD. Can do! but you'll only get 30 mins of battery using current technology - who wants one?
good point about battery life. All of the pc laptops with these high-end features have no battery life. I'm reminded of the Toshiba Sat 5000 with an advertised 1.7 hrs of battery life (mind you, it will be much lower) with a 10 hr recharge time if the machine is on. By contrast, I can edit audio for hours on my pb before charging, and once I have to, it only takes 1/2 to 1 hr to charge while still pushing the machine to the limit. Those high-end laptops of the pc world are nothing less than compact desktops that can be momentarily unplugged.
I wish I'd been first in the queue to shut this (original) guy up!<hr></blockquote>
yea. would have worked had you had an idea what you were talking about
[quote]1. NO SUCH THING AS LAPTOP DDR RAM.<hr></blockquote>
yet the latest PC laptops use DDR RAM. The whole point was that the Ti design may be limiting the Powerbookm at competing in the desktop replacement category. DDR RAM while maybe not in a pure laptop form factor right now is in PC laptops that compete with the powerbook.
[quote]2. 800Mhz G4 will be included in the next PB - fact - they're out their with test corps.<hr></blockquote>
that's nice but means nothing if the update is several months away. it should be here already
[quote]3. IBM is not shipping sufficient 60Gb travelstars, not enough for their own channel needs, now the 48Gb's are in full supply, what do you want? a great laptop you can buy or a (slightly) better one you can't?<hr></blockquote>
ever hear of build to order? I know you did. 30GB, 40GB standard. 60GB BTO. problem solved
[quote]4. The GForce2Go currently requires too much power, Apple will not put this version in a laptop, there will be a v1.1/1.5 version that sorts (some) of that out in May/June, they'll have that. Apple will not be pursuing the Radeon line further.<hr></blockquote>
Geforce 4Go is out now buddy and so is the radeon 7500 which has been out for months.
[quote]5. Apple sold their stake in Samsung in Oct 2001, they no longer have any control of LCDs, preferencial prices yes, but no control. The yield ratio on the PB 1152s is still too low, as are the 1280 4:3's that everybody else uses. 1600 LCDs in that size would be prohibitively expensive and will remain so for 24-30 months and will would draw too much power.<hr></blockquote>
have any proof? you speak of this as truth yet have no evidence. considering its just a different sized cut in the glass it doesn't seem like it would be "prohibitely" more expensive. and if so why not offer it as BTO. people will pay. this is apple.
[quote]
Let me get this straight, you want a 1Ghz+ G4, with a 82Gb drive (which are being announced 2nd week of May), with 2Gb of made-up-laptop-DDR (or would you prefer Rambus?), probably USB2, Gigawire, why not go for an STM-64 interface, oh and 1920 LCD. Can do! but you'll only get 30 mins of battery using current technology - who wants one?<hr></blockquote>
uh no. not really. asking to have the following NOW
800Mhz G4
48GB HD
512 MB RAM
Radeon 7500 32 MB DDR RAM
Higher resolution display
for 2999 is not outlandish. hell its very conservative and way below PC competitiors.
[quote]Forget "Think Different", "Think" will do fine. <hr></blockquote>
stop kissing your own ass like you were God's gift to man. your post was ridiculous and baseless.
Applenut, you are one of the most arrogant, bitchy, obnoxious posters at AI. Why don't you chill out more often? Smoke a doobie if that's what it takes but someday you're going to realize that the center of the universe isn't where you're at. It's nice that you go around reading about tech gizmos and have all the Apple specs memorized, but when it comes to reasoning and real world thinking, you're a child. Come to think of it, you still live with your mom, don't you?
<strong>Applenut, you are one of the most arrogant, bitchy, obnoxious posters at AI. Why don't you chill out more often? Smoke a doobie if that's what it takes but someday you're going to realize that the center of the universe isn't where you're at. It's nice that you go around reading about tech gizmos and have all the Apple specs memorized, but when it comes to reasoning and real world thinking, you're a child. Come to think of it, you still live with your mom, don't you?</strong><hr></blockquote>
coming from the man who is talking about dick sizer in comparison to Mhz in another thread I don't think I should even take your comment with a grain of salt.
Comments
<strong>
UMA is very real. It has existed since the first iBook. It's not really a set feature set. it's more like the sahring of components to the best of Apple's abilities. The Cube was also based on UMA. In fact it was pretty much a powermac g4 board broken into pieces.
If you look at the developer docs you'll see that the latest revs of all the machines include an updated architecture that all share many of the same things. Most notably the Pangea chip.
I just think people are wrong when they say Apple is planning UMA2 or whatever like that. UMA seems to just be sharing components across lines. not really a set in stone revision based thing</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is the current iMac's chip based on UMA? It's only one board so I'm thinking no, but does it have something from the PMG4 or PBG4 melted into it? (not literally.)
<strong>
Is the current iMac's chip based on UMA? It's only one board so I'm thinking no, but does it have something from the PMG4 or PBG4 melted into it? (not literally.)</strong><hr></blockquote>
sure. but its things that don't really matter much to us. like ICs and such.
if you look at the block diagrams you'll see that nearly all the machines are the same except for stuff added on like PCI slots or faster buses and AGP slots, etc.
<strong>sure. but its things that don't really matter much to us. like ICs and such.
if you look at the block diagrams you'll see that nearly all the machines are the same except for stuff added on like PCI slots or faster buses and AGP slots, etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, actually the major components only seem to be shared across the consumer and pro lines, respectively. That is, the iMac and iBook have the unified Pangea system controller, whereas the PowerMac and PowerBook (and formerly the Cube) feature a more classical Northbridge-Southbridge setup (Uni-N and KeyLargo).
Bye,
RazzFazz
Exactly my point: does Apple want to have a consolidated shared line of core components? Yes, but there is no hardwired spec, and certainly no version 2 at this point. Please, most of the UMA talk has centered around UMA 1.5, which was a way for us to say that the components are neither UMA 1 or UMA 2. So, yes, I say it doesn't exist anymore because if it is just a philosophy of trying to use the same components as frequently as possibly, it's not an architecture nomenclature.
1. NO SUCH THING AS LAPTOP DDR RAM.
2. 800Mhz G4 will be included in the next PB - fact - they're out their with test corps.
3. IBM is not shipping sufficient 60Gb travelstars, not enough for their own channel needs, now the 48Gb's are in full supply, what do you want? a great laptop you can buy or a (slightly) better one you can't?
4. The GForce2Go currently requires too much power, Apple will not put this version in a laptop, there will be a v1.1/1.5 version that sorts (some) of that out in May/June, they'll have that. Apple will not be pursuing the Radeon line further.
5. Apple sold their stake in Samsung in Oct 2001, they no longer have any control of LCDs, preferencial prices yes, but no control. The yield ratio on the PB 1152s is still too low, as are the 1280 4:3's that everybody else uses. 1600 LCDs in that size would be prohibitively expensive and will remain so for 24-30 months and will would draw too much power.
Let me get this straight, you want a 1Ghz+ G4, with a 82Gb drive (which are being announced 2nd week of May), with 2Gb of made-up-laptop-DDR (or would you prefer Rambus?), probably USB2, Gigawire, why not go for an STM-64 interface, oh and 1920 LCD. Can do! but you'll only get 30 mins of battery using current technology - who wants one?
Forget "Think Different", "Think" will do fine.
[ 03-14-2002: Message edited by: giant ]
[ 03-14-2002: Message edited by: giant ]</p>
I wish I'd been first in the queue to shut this (original) guy up!<hr></blockquote>
yea. would have worked had you had an idea what you were talking about
[quote]1. NO SUCH THING AS LAPTOP DDR RAM.<hr></blockquote>
yet the latest PC laptops use DDR RAM. The whole point was that the Ti design may be limiting the Powerbookm at competing in the desktop replacement category. DDR RAM while maybe not in a pure laptop form factor right now is in PC laptops that compete with the powerbook.
[quote]2. 800Mhz G4 will be included in the next PB - fact - they're out their with test corps.<hr></blockquote>
that's nice but means nothing if the update is several months away. it should be here already
[quote]3. IBM is not shipping sufficient 60Gb travelstars, not enough for their own channel needs, now the 48Gb's are in full supply, what do you want? a great laptop you can buy or a (slightly) better one you can't?<hr></blockquote>
ever hear of build to order? I know you did. 30GB, 40GB standard. 60GB BTO. problem solved
[quote]4. The GForce2Go currently requires too much power, Apple will not put this version in a laptop, there will be a v1.1/1.5 version that sorts (some) of that out in May/June, they'll have that. Apple will not be pursuing the Radeon line further.<hr></blockquote>
Geforce 4Go is out now buddy and so is the radeon 7500 which has been out for months.
[quote]5. Apple sold their stake in Samsung in Oct 2001, they no longer have any control of LCDs, preferencial prices yes, but no control. The yield ratio on the PB 1152s is still too low, as are the 1280 4:3's that everybody else uses. 1600 LCDs in that size would be prohibitively expensive and will remain so for 24-30 months and will would draw too much power.<hr></blockquote>
have any proof? you speak of this as truth yet have no evidence. considering its just a different sized cut in the glass it doesn't seem like it would be "prohibitely" more expensive. and if so why not offer it as BTO. people will pay. this is apple.
[quote]
Let me get this straight, you want a 1Ghz+ G4, with a 82Gb drive (which are being announced 2nd week of May), with 2Gb of made-up-laptop-DDR (or would you prefer Rambus?), probably USB2, Gigawire, why not go for an STM-64 interface, oh and 1920 LCD. Can do! but you'll only get 30 mins of battery using current technology - who wants one?<hr></blockquote>
uh no. not really. asking to have the following NOW
800Mhz G4
48GB HD
512 MB RAM
Radeon 7500 32 MB DDR RAM
Higher resolution display
for 2999 is not outlandish. hell its very conservative and way below PC competitiors.
[quote]Forget "Think Different", "Think" will do fine. <hr></blockquote>
stop kissing your own ass like you were God's gift to man. your post was ridiculous and baseless.
Also, I'll have dual low-power 800's please. The solution to the heat issue is with the gel cooling system developed by Toshiba last year.
Funny, but whenever I see a posting by JD, I think of Sinbad.
And Applenut, I don't know why you post like you just got back from being spanked by your daddy in the tool shed.
<strong>I wish I'd been first in the queue to shut this (original) guy up!
1. NO SUCH THING AS LAPTOP DDR RAM.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, that was true some months ago, but there are DDR SO-DIMMs now (at least most of the new notebooks with P4-M processors have it).
Bye,
RazzFazz
Apple said: "No new CPU's"
this, IMO, sounds like "No faster CPU's"
so then why can't they up the speed of the Pbook?
why are we all so pessimistic?
Has the last MW let-down gotten us all down?
I foresee definite updates in the PB and iBook sectors, faster chips, more in line with the PM sector.
Obviously no 2x1Ghz PB, but hopefully a 1Ghz, 933Mhz & 800Mhz PB's; and 800Mhz & 700Mhz iB's. Updated memory, storage, video, etc all added welcomes.
No new CPU's...just updated hardware.
I hope
[ 03-15-2002: Message edited by: g::masta ]</p>
<strong>Applenut, you are one of the most arrogant, bitchy, obnoxious posters at AI. Why don't you chill out more often? Smoke a doobie if that's what it takes but someday you're going to realize that the center of the universe isn't where you're at. It's nice that you go around reading about tech gizmos and have all the Apple specs memorized, but when it comes to reasoning and real world thinking, you're a child. Come to think of it, you still live with your mom, don't you?</strong><hr></blockquote>
coming from the man who is talking about dick sizer in comparison to Mhz in another thread I don't think I should even take your comment with a grain of salt.