<strong>discreet's high-end film effects package flame* (or have they dropped the asterisks now?) operator. and by high-end, we do mean hih-end here.</strong><hr></blockquote>
discreet.com. Looks expensive and may be somewhat processor/bandwidth intensive.
Q: Have you learned anything new through the stores about your customers or potential PC switchers?
A: We have learned a ton. The data coming out of the stores right now is important in terms of bringing incremental new customers to the Mac. We'll be sharing a lot of that in future earnings calls and around the Macworld timeframe as well. So I'll save that for then.
Do you think Apple will start a new promotion along the lines of "A FREE!! LOLLIPOP FOR EVERY CONVERTED PC USER THAT BUYS A MAC!"?
<strong>It should also be noted that the POWER4 smokes the competition on a 0.18 micron process technology! They are set to move to a 0.13 micron technology in the 2nd half of '02.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Do you really think that the 4 is possible for a Mac chip? You seem to know what you're talking about, so would you consider the possibility of a POWER4 introduction at MWNY/MWSF plausable?
-they need faster hardware and more open standards in hard and software
That's things people have been crying for for ages, and now may be the time Apple hears about it. Doesn't mean they're going to actually do something about it.
G-News
PS: Oh I forgot the multi-button mouse, of course. That's a given for MWNY.
Do you really think that the 4 is possible for a Mac chip? You seem to know what you're talking about, so would you consider the possibility of a POWER4 introduction at MWNY/MWSF plausable?</strong><hr></blockquote>
The POWER4, as it stands now, is simply too expensive of a chip for Apple's consumer or even Pro machines.
My point was that the PPC architecture is actually doing extremely well, just the designs from MOT have been lackluster. IBM has been cranking out some very impressive supercomputer/workstation/server CPUs for some time, and the POWER4 architecture has legs.
Could Apple use the POWER4? Not in its current form -- it is too pricey. It sure would be interesting to see what would come out of a revision to the POWER4 to scale down the costs and make it more suitable for desktop/consumer use.
Do you really think that the 4 is possible for a Mac chip? You seem to know what you're talking about, so would you consider the possibility of a POWER4 introduction at MWNY/MWSF plausable?</strong>[/QUOTE]
IBM flexes Power4 as it ships Regatta servers
By David Lammers EE Times
October 4, 2001 (2:07 p.m. EST) \t
Â* AUSTIN, Texas Â? IBM Corp.'s high-end Â?RegattaÂ? Unix servers Â? ranging from an eight-way, 1.1-GHz system, priced at $450,000 up to a 32-way system that hits supercomputer-level speeds Â? are ready to ship, the company's server division announced Thursday (Oct. 4) .
Even if Apple could deliver desktops using the Power4 by MWSF, and at half the price; $225,000 is out of my price range no matter how many games are preloaded on the machine.
<strong>The POWER4, as it stands now, is simply too expensive of a chip for Apple's consumer or even Pro machines.
My point was that the PPC architecture is actually doing extremely well, just the designs from MOT have been lackluster. IBM has been cranking out some very impressive supercomputer/workstation/server CPUs for some time, and the POWER4 architecture has legs.
Could Apple use the POWER4? Not in its current form -- it is too pricey. It sure would be interesting to see what would come out of a revision to the POWER4 to scale down the costs and make it more suitable for desktop/consumer use.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Exactly -- I tried to say as much in my message above. Technology is constantly moving forward, however, and a move to 0.13 microns plus the addition of AltiVec and a memory controller / HT bus would make for a very powerful desktop machine. The current POWER4 is 170 million transistors, compared to about 50-60 million in the Pentium4 and less than 30 in the current G4, IIRC. The current generation nVidia GPU is about 65 million, and the next generation is going to be a step up from that.... so a single core version of the POWER4, or a dual core with smaller caches should be in about the right ballpark for a chip introduced in this timeframe (i.e. between now and January).
Also note that the POWER4 as it currently stands has a 17 stage pipeline. Yes, seventeen. The POWER3 has 5 stages and the current G4 has 7. This thing is a radically different machine than the previous generation of POWER/PPC machines, much like the Pentium2 was a radical departure from the Pentium1 (and 3 -> 4 as well). On a smaller process a 75+ million transistor POWER4 derived PPC should be able to scale well past 1 GHz (i.e. the rumoured 2+ GHz G5 shouldn't be out of reach).
My point (and Moki's, if he doesn't mind me putting words in his mouth) is that it is possible for Apple to catch up in one significant jump. Whether it comes at MWNY or 6 months from now, I don't know -- but you can bet that Apple has been planning it since the G4 fiasco (and before).
Â* AUSTIN, Texas Â? IBM Corp.'s high-end Â?RegattaÂ? Unix servers Â? ranging from an eight-way, 1.1-GHz system, priced at $450,000 up to a 32-way system that hits supercomputer-level speeds Â? are ready to ship, the company's server division announced Thursday (Oct. 4) .
Even if Apple could deliver desktops using the Power4 by MWSF, and at half the price; $225,000 is out of my price range no matter how many games are preloaded on the machine.
Heh, I was wondering if somebody was going to quote that. The reason for it being so expensive is not the processing core, however. This machine has a very high speed 32 megabyte L3 cache, big fast wide busses (read: extremely expensive motherboards), huge memories, and tons and tons and tons of exceedingly fast I/O. It makes the Xserve look like an abacus. But at its core it is still a PowerPC. Kinda gives me a warm and cozy feeling inside.
The POWER4 is really a clear indication that there isn't something fundamental about the PowerPC that makes it slower than x86. What makes it slower is a set of design decisions which place emphasis on aspects other than raw, brute force computing power. The G4 is actually a very good processor, and was voted best embedded processor my some organziation or another. The next desktop processor that Apple will use is going to have a different set of tradeoffs and leverage newer process technology, and there is no reason for it not to be competitive with the x86 world.
<strong>Â* AUSTIN, Texas Â? IBM Corp.'s high-end Â?RegattaÂ? Unix servers Â? ranging from an eight-way, 1.1-GHz system, priced at $450,000 up to a 32-way system that hits supercomputer-level speeds Â? are ready to ship, the company's server division announced Thursday (Oct. 4) .
Even if Apple could deliver desktops using the Power4 by MWSF, and at half the price; $225,000 is out of my price range no matter how many games are preloaded on the machine.
I have been suprised to learn how far the definition of PowerPC stretches. It would of course be great if Apple could make use of better chips, even the Power4 in something less modest than the X-serve.
I'm guessing that since the Power4 requires Parallel programming it would require additional code to run Darwin ??? And, this would make it unattractive to Apple?
BTW Would anyone care to compare and contrast a possible Moto multi core e500 w/ Power4?
<strong>discreet's high-end film effects package flame* (or have they dropped the asterisks now?) operator. and by high-end, we do mean hih-end here.</strong><hr></blockquote>
yes. sorry. the higher end product is called inferno*. that's the one they use for film rez. flame is generally used for television. they also have a system called fire and their plug-ins are called sparks.
I'm thinking the "big thing" at MWNY will be an Apple designed PowerPC processor. There's been rumors that the next Power Mac will be called the X1. It might just also be a change in naming conventions.....
<strong>I'm thinking the "big thing" at MWNY will be an Apple designed PowerPC processor. There's been rumors that the next Power Mac will be called the X1. It might just also be a change in naming conventions.....</strong><hr></blockquote>
I see where you're going with that. Apple's not stupid; they know that Motorola doesn't give a damn about the PPC; they know that the PPC is a good chip that needs some personal, caring touch.
Doesn't that whole AIM agreement end soon? Like this summer. . .
<strong>IBM Corp.'s high-end ?Regatta? Unix servers ? ranging from an eight-way, 1.1-GHz system, priced at $450,000 up to a 32-way system that hits supercomputer-level speeds. . .</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay, I see. Maybe Steve would sell his jet to pay for a couple (really) of these things. What I was actually pointing too was the possibility of a scaled-down version of the POWER4. Looks like our PPC architechture is looking pretty good. . .
<strong>I'm thinking the "big thing" at MWNY will be an Apple designed PowerPC processor. There's been rumors that the next Power Mac will be called the X1. It might just also be a change in naming conventions.....</strong><hr></blockquote>
I would love to see an Apple designed PowerPC processor, after all, it's their system , they know what they want. I say, "Go for it Apple!"
Is IBM still committed to the development of the PowerPC? Or will Apple, continue the development of the PowerPC alone ?
Comments
<strong>discreet's high-end film effects package flame* (or have they dropped the asterisks now?) operator. and by high-end, we do mean hih-end here.</strong><hr></blockquote>
discreet.com. Looks expensive and may be somewhat processor/bandwidth intensive.
Q: Have you learned anything new through the stores about your customers or potential PC switchers?
A: We have learned a ton. The data coming out of the stores right now is important in terms of bringing incremental new customers to the Mac. We'll be sharing a lot of that in future earnings calls and around the Macworld timeframe as well. So I'll save that for then.
Do you think Apple will start a new promotion along the lines of "A FREE!! LOLLIPOP FOR EVERY CONVERTED PC USER THAT BUYS A MAC!"?
<strong>What is a "Flame Artist"?</strong><hr></blockquote>
They draw flames for a living?
<strong>It should also be noted that the POWER4 smokes the competition on a 0.18 micron process technology! They are set to move to a 0.13 micron technology in the 2nd half of '02.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Do you really think that the 4 is possible for a Mac chip? You seem to know what you're talking about, so would you consider the possibility of a POWER4 introduction at MWNY/MWSF plausable?
-they need lower prices, a LOT lower prices
-they need more software, and more compatibility
-they need faster hardware and more open standards in hard and software
That's things people have been crying for for ages, and now may be the time Apple hears about it. Doesn't mean they're going to actually do something about it.
G-News
PS: Oh I forgot the multi-button mouse, of course. That's a given for MWNY.
[ 06-08-2002: Message edited by: G-News ]</p>
<strong>
Do you really think that the 4 is possible for a Mac chip? You seem to know what you're talking about, so would you consider the possibility of a POWER4 introduction at MWNY/MWSF plausable?</strong><hr></blockquote>
The POWER4, as it stands now, is simply too expensive of a chip for Apple's consumer or even Pro machines.
My point was that the PPC architecture is actually doing extremely well, just the designs from MOT have been lackluster. IBM has been cranking out some very impressive supercomputer/workstation/server CPUs for some time, and the POWER4 architecture has legs.
Could Apple use the POWER4? Not in its current form -- it is too pricey. It sure would be interesting to see what would come out of a revision to the POWER4 to scale down the costs and make it more suitable for desktop/consumer use.
<strong>
Do you really think that the 4 is possible for a Mac chip? You seem to know what you're talking about, so would you consider the possibility of a POWER4 introduction at MWNY/MWSF plausable?</strong>[/QUOTE]
IBM flexes Power4 as it ships Regatta servers
By David Lammers EE Times
October 4, 2001 (2:07 p.m. EST) \t
Â* AUSTIN, Texas Â? IBM Corp.'s high-end Â?RegattaÂ? Unix servers Â? ranging from an eight-way, 1.1-GHz system, priced at $450,000 up to a 32-way system that hits supercomputer-level speeds Â? are ready to ship, the company's server division announced Thursday (Oct. 4) .
Even if Apple could deliver desktops using the Power4 by MWSF, and at half the price; $225,000 is out of my price range no matter how many games are preloaded on the machine.
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
<strong>The POWER4, as it stands now, is simply too expensive of a chip for Apple's consumer or even Pro machines.
My point was that the PPC architecture is actually doing extremely well, just the designs from MOT have been lackluster. IBM has been cranking out some very impressive supercomputer/workstation/server CPUs for some time, and the POWER4 architecture has legs.
Could Apple use the POWER4? Not in its current form -- it is too pricey. It sure would be interesting to see what would come out of a revision to the POWER4 to scale down the costs and make it more suitable for desktop/consumer use.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Exactly -- I tried to say as much in my message above. Technology is constantly moving forward, however, and a move to 0.13 microns plus the addition of AltiVec and a memory controller / HT bus would make for a very powerful desktop machine. The current POWER4 is 170 million transistors, compared to about 50-60 million in the Pentium4 and less than 30 in the current G4, IIRC. The current generation nVidia GPU is about 65 million, and the next generation is going to be a step up from that.... so a single core version of the POWER4, or a dual core with smaller caches should be in about the right ballpark for a chip introduced in this timeframe (i.e. between now and January).
Also note that the POWER4 as it currently stands has a 17 stage pipeline. Yes, seventeen. The POWER3 has 5 stages and the current G4 has 7. This thing is a radically different machine than the previous generation of POWER/PPC machines, much like the Pentium2 was a radical departure from the Pentium1 (and 3 -> 4 as well). On a smaller process a 75+ million transistor POWER4 derived PPC should be able to scale well past 1 GHz (i.e. the rumoured 2+ GHz G5 shouldn't be out of reach).
My point (and Moki's, if he doesn't mind me putting words in his mouth) is that it is possible for Apple to catch up in one significant jump. Whether it comes at MWNY or 6 months from now, I don't know -- but you can bet that Apple has been planning it since the G4 fiasco (and before).
IBM flexes Power4 as it ships Regatta servers
By David Lammers EE Times
October 4, 2001 (2:07 p.m. EST) \t
Â* AUSTIN, Texas Â? IBM Corp.'s high-end Â?RegattaÂ? Unix servers Â? ranging from an eight-way, 1.1-GHz system, priced at $450,000 up to a 32-way system that hits supercomputer-level speeds Â? are ready to ship, the company's server division announced Thursday (Oct. 4) .
Even if Apple could deliver desktops using the Power4 by MWSF, and at half the price; $225,000 is out of my price range no matter how many games are preloaded on the machine.
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Heh, I was wondering if somebody was going to quote that. The reason for it being so expensive is not the processing core, however. This machine has a very high speed 32 megabyte L3 cache, big fast wide busses (read: extremely expensive motherboards), huge memories, and tons and tons and tons of exceedingly fast I/O. It makes the Xserve look like an abacus. But at its core it is still a PowerPC. Kinda gives me a warm and cozy feeling inside.
The POWER4 is really a clear indication that there isn't something fundamental about the PowerPC that makes it slower than x86. What makes it slower is a set of design decisions which place emphasis on aspects other than raw, brute force computing power. The G4 is actually a very good processor, and was voted best embedded processor my some organziation or another. The next desktop processor that Apple will use is going to have a different set of tradeoffs and leverage newer process technology, and there is no reason for it not to be competitive with the x86 world.
[ 06-08-2002: Message edited by: Programmer ]
[ 06-08-2002: Message edited by: Programmer ]</p>
<strong>Â* AUSTIN, Texas Â? IBM Corp.'s high-end Â?RegattaÂ? Unix servers Â? ranging from an eight-way, 1.1-GHz system, priced at $450,000 up to a 32-way system that hits supercomputer-level speeds Â? are ready to ship, the company's server division announced Thursday (Oct. 4) .
Even if Apple could deliver desktops using the Power4 by MWSF, and at half the price; $225,000 is out of my price range no matter how many games are preloaded on the machine.
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Right, but that's for a high-end, 32 processor server platform. I wouldn't mind just having one of the dual CPU cores in my desktop Mac
I have been suprised to learn how far the definition of PowerPC stretches. It would of course be great if Apple could make use of better chips, even the Power4 in something less modest than the X-serve.
I'm guessing that since the Power4 requires Parallel programming it would require additional code to run Darwin ??? And, this would make it unattractive to Apple?
BTW Would anyone care to compare and contrast a possible Moto multi core e500 w/ Power4?
<strong>discreet's high-end film effects package flame* (or have they dropped the asterisks now?) operator. and by high-end, we do mean hih-end here.</strong><hr></blockquote>
yes. sorry. the higher end product is called inferno*. that's the one they use for film rez. flame is generally used for television. they also have a system called fire and their plug-ins are called sparks.
<strong>I'm thinking the "big thing" at MWNY will be an Apple designed PowerPC processor. There's been rumors that the next Power Mac will be called the X1. It might just also be a change in naming conventions.....</strong><hr></blockquote>
I see where you're going with that. Apple's not stupid; they know that Motorola doesn't give a damn about the PPC; they know that the PPC is a good chip that needs some personal, caring touch.
Doesn't that whole AIM agreement end soon? Like this summer. . .
<strong>IBM Corp.'s high-end ?Regatta? Unix servers ? ranging from an eight-way, 1.1-GHz system, priced at $450,000 up to a 32-way system that hits supercomputer-level speeds. . .</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay, I see. Maybe Steve would sell his jet to pay for a couple (really) of these things. What I was actually pointing too was the possibility of a scaled-down version of the POWER4. Looks like our PPC architechture is looking pretty good. . .
<strong>I'm thinking the "big thing" at MWNY will be an Apple designed PowerPC processor. There's been rumors that the next Power Mac will be called the X1. It might just also be a change in naming conventions.....</strong><hr></blockquote>
I would love to see an Apple designed PowerPC processor, after all, it's their system , they know what they want. I say, "Go for it Apple!"
Is IBM still committed to the development of the PowerPC? Or will Apple, continue the development of the PowerPC alone ?
[ 06-08-2002: Message edited by: MacMatt ]</p>
I read something a while back to look to someone else other then MOTO for Apple's next chip.