7457 RM canceled by Motorola, 970 on track

1235710

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 182
    I think IF this is the plan IBM & Apple have, it can make sense:



    IBM gets the back office (where they where always likely to win anyway)



    Apple gets the front office.



    IBM wins no matter what because they're not making any money as it is on desktops, so if they sell tons of extra chips to Apple as a result of a partnership, hey big bonus ...



    Apple wins because IBM becomes their trojan horse into areas they would never have otherwise gotten into, and IBM might finally start taking WebObjects and Objective-C (and CORE Foundation) seriously (as they should) ... or, in the worse case, some of their boffo hi-end tools will migrate to Apple.



    Either way, it's a great dance because there won't be (much) stepping on toes.



    pretty cool huh?



    [edit grammar: fricketty-hell]
  • Reply 82 of 182
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ed M.

    What I can't understand is that IBM stated that they designed the 970 for the *DESKTOP* market too; implying that they might offer desktops. . .







    They could be referring to Mac desktop computers, without saying so. They simply stated the target markets for a 970, and not IBM's intention to use the 970 in all such markets. However, I might not be remembering exactly what IBM said.
  • Reply 83 of 182
    jrgjrg Posts: 58member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by snoopy

    They could be referring to Mac desktop computers, without saying so. They simply stated the target markets for a 970, and not IBM's intention to use the 970 in all such markets. However, I might not be remembering exactly what IBM said.



    Remember, IBM sell workstations too. In fact you could pick up a powerful 200MHz based 604e system off of IBM for only $11,000! Bargain.



    The great thing about the 970 etc is that IBM desperately needs them itself. And the future versions.
  • Reply 84 of 182
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JRG





    . . . The great thing about the 970 etc is that IBM desperately needs them itself. And the future versions.




    At last, a microprocessor vendor who wants to beat the competition.
  • Reply 85 of 182
    Now that Intel are banging on the door of IBM's turf, it's in IBM's interest to get themselves and PPC out of bed.



    Lemon Bon Bon
  • Reply 86 of 182
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Yes, but IBM's desperation has been a fleeting thing. Obviously they were't desperate enough to update that 200Mhz 604 machine, or develop the G3 into something competitive in the desktop market, or even make any truly relevant desktop/server/workstation CPU other than the insanely expensive POWER chips.



    IBM might just be content to sell the same old 1.8Ghz PPC970 in 3-4 years time. It happened before, it can happen again. How big a market is there really for desktop non-windows IBM towers/workstations??? NOT servers or big iron, to which IBM can always throw power chips rather than PPC's.



    I don't think it's that big. Apple almost certainly will buy/sell more desktop PPC than IBM. The seeds of discontent are already planted even if no one wants to see it.



    Some other arrangements must be made. Apple ALWAYS has to have contingency plans at the ready, that's what hapens to you when you have less than 3% of the market. A second supplier has to be at the ready. Mebbe that's Moto, mebbe that's Apple acquiring Moto designs and patents and shopping custom PPC designs around, mebbe that's even Apple taking a greater role in contributing to the design of the PPC (in the form of engineers and money) that IBM would fab and also use in some of their products.



    It's is not enough that a company is interested now, Apple has to have a way to light a fire under their ass, or make significant contributions if/when development lags.
  • Reply 87 of 182
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon

    Now that Intel are banging on the door of IBM's turf, it's in IBM's interest to get themselves and PPC out of bed.





    How so El Bee-Bee?
  • Reply 88 of 182
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,401member
    I know this is off topic but if Apple releases all single processor machines I hope they have an option on each model to add another processor.
  • Reply 89 of 182
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu





    I don't think it's that big. Apple almost certainly will buy/sell more desktop PPC than IBM. The seeds of discontent are already planted even if no one wants to see it.





    ... ah, but this state of affairs was before the 'kelp' of the computer age (or Grapefruit, whichever geologically very new lifeform you prefer) came onto the stage: THE BLADE.



    schwing! (ai!)



    Blades seem to be taking over many a niche, more than a fad, less than a breakthru (well, a little), but definitely more than just another form factor ... where-ever they got the idea from (perhaps dial-up modem racks of the mid 90's?) it seems to fit in perfecty with many things, especially as a bridge point between both IBM's and Apple's plans ...



    In short, blades aren't going to go away, they're definitely back office (IBM country) and the competition keeps making them since everybody seems to want them; thus, it behooves (I love that word) ... yes, it behooves IBM to keep making chips to handle that niche ... ok, mebbe 'behooves' is a little strong, but let's just say that IBM has an advantage with the 970 in this ever expanding niche with a chip that is very powerful, low power consumption and runs (relatively) cool ...



    The next battle for the back office shall be fought with blades, and IBM plans to make their own from the ground up (with a litte Xeon thrown in for ass covering) ...



    And into this fray comes Apple, who needs a chip that pretty much perfectly matches the blade spec ... admittedly, asking an embedded chip company (moto) to cough up energy to make a desktop is a bit of a leap, but asking a behemoth (laviathan, hey, it's your call) to schwinge the design of a BLADE chip, somethng that sits nicely between a heat-honkin' x86 desktop and a coy embedded thing, a tad more in the desktop direction ain't asking much ... which is why Apple shouldn't worry too much about IBM orphaning the 9X0 series, especially considering the POWER5 derivative coming down the pipe.





    Anything's possible - David Hume and all that - but we're put on this earth to choose between realistic options, so while it's still somewhat possible that IBM might roll their eyes in a mighty WTF? in a year or so and orphan the 970, considering the blade scenario (and the upcoming POWER5 derivative at 4x the speed of the 970 - apparently) this seems rather unlikely: but most importantly ... you don't get to go on the same ride twice, and the ride that brought us a 200Mhz 604e workstation just doesn't seem to be around anymore.



    Summing up: mitigated realism says we shouldn't be too concerned about getting run over by it.



    (that's enough sentiments for today)
  • Reply 90 of 182
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by OverToasty





    . . . Blades seem to be taking over many a niche, more than a fad, less than a breakthru . . .







    Does it make sense for Apple to use blades in the new PowerMacs? I could see room for possibly four blades, before heat becomes a big issue. Need more power? Just add blades. I had rejected this idea a while back, but reading your post made me reconsider.



    Regarding cooling. A technique not mentions in most discussion on cooling is a continuously variable speed blower. Its speed can be gradually changed to accommodate cooling needs At low speeds it is almost silent, and a slow, gradual increases in speed is less noticeable than sudden jumps in speed. The larger a blower or fan, the less noise it makes for any given airflow. That is because it delivers the same flow of air at lower RPM. Such a blower could be directed right across the blade stall.
  • Reply 91 of 182
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by snoopy

    Does it make sense for Apple to use blades in the new PowerMacs? I could see room for possibly four blades, before heat becomes a big issue. Need more power? Just add blades. I had rejected this idea a while back, but reading your post made me reconsider.



    NeXT had a setup like this, actually, and frogdesign came up with a blade setup for Apple in the mid-80s.



    Quote:

    Regarding cooling. A technique not mentions in most discussion on cooling is a continuously variable speed blower. Its speed can be gradually changed to accommodate cooling needs At low speeds it is almost silent, and a slow, gradual increases in speed is less noticeable than sudden jumps in speed. The larger a blower or fan, the less noise it makes for any given airflow. That is because it delivers the same flow of air at lower RPM. Such a blower could be directed right across the blade stall.



    This is pretty much what the 120mm "leaf blower" in MDD PowerMacs does now.
  • Reply 92 of 182
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Amorph

    This is pretty much what the 120mm "leaf blower" in MDD PowerMacs does now.



    Unfortunately, it's a poor quality fan, thus yielding the 'leaf blower' nomenclature.



    That, and the other three in the box... all low quality...
  • Reply 93 of 182
    nevynnevyn Posts: 360member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    Yes, but IBM's desperation has been a fleeting thing. Obviously they were't desperate enough to update that 200Mhz 604 machine, or develop the G3 into something competitive in the desktop market, or even make any truly relevant desktop/server/workstation CPU other than the insanely expensive POWER chips.



    But that's the whole friggin point.



    With the G3, IBM made the chip... but they had _no_ interest in _using_ the chip.



    With the 604, IBM made the chip, and it was useful, but it was superceded by the Power3/4's....



    But this is a new era. There's been a lot more development on parallel processing/load distribution/etc. The 970 is going into more than one line of IBM's. Sure, some of those lines might not need frequent upgrading. But the _blades_ are a line that are relatively easy to pop new CPU speeds into, so that's at least one line IBM would want up-to-speed. The entire point of slamming maximum computing power in minimum space is DAFT if you're using 3-year-old-tech.
  • Reply 94 of 182
    ed m.ed m. Posts: 222member
    Well, I don't know what IBM's intentions are for the rest of the Intel line, but it seems pretty clear that they're out to squash the Itanic. How would you guys interpret this little snippet:



    Quote:

    "I won't tell you that we haven't had those discussions [to drop Power and go with Itanium]," said Robert Amezcua, pSeries vice president at IBM. "We looked hard at the future roadmaps, and we believe strongly that we have the answer in Power technology. The [IBM] xSeries team has an Itanium box, and we are out to make sure Itanium doesn't survive."



    That was taken from here: IBM plots road ahead with Power5



    Now If Itanic dies, that leaves Intel strapped with the old monkey of x86 competing with AMD once again - that can't be good for them. Just how long does Intel expect to be saddled (hindered?) with such an architecture? It's obvious that Itanic was supposed to mark a turning point *away* from x86. With all the uncertainty, it really does look as if the Wintelon world will be stuck with x86 for a very, very, very looooong time. If that's the case then I see PowerPC advancing even further as time progresses. Say what you will, but it appears that the Wintelon camp has painted itself into a corner. Anyone disagree?



    --

    Ed
  • Reply 95 of 182
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Jonathan

    Unfortunately, it's a poor quality fan, thus yielding the 'leaf blower' nomenclature.



    That, and the other three in the box... all low quality...




    Apparently, current machines ship with Papst fans, which I am given to understand are quite high quality. The "silencer" kit Apple ships to owners of older MDDs also uses Papst fans. So they figured that much out.



    Nevertheless, Apple has already shipped machines using variable-rate fans. At least the "leaf blower" is usually idle...
  • Reply 96 of 182
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    I get it, but I'm just throwing the other side out there for consideration. Despite a slow trend towards clusters, and distributed computing, there is no guarantee that IBM won't present difficulties and it would be wise for Apple to have "options" Which they like, right? Mebbe Apple will have to be more closely involved in PPC design in the future. I can see the PPC getting lost between embedded and big iron applications. IBm can always look elsewhere for the desktop, so that is always the CPU line with the greatest susceptibility to stagnation and disinterest, and coincedentally the only CPU Apple should be interested in.



    However, I agree that there is enough about the 970 to make us very optimistic about it's ability to subtely alter the computing paradigms of desktop future -- more like to a blade or multi CPU environment with it's ability to pack lotsa chip to chip to memory throughput and lotsa power into a very nice small, efficient package. The CPU itself could evolve two ways, get faster and faster, or get smaller and cooler at the same speeds, and even more suitable to 2, 4, 8... way machines.



    It is the best option for Apple for now, but unexpected turns ought to be expected by now, anything can happen.



    I guess you're all right to be happy though, present concerns are too great to worry about the future ATM. Let's give big blue a chance.
  • Reply 97 of 182
    bigcbigc Posts: 1,224member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ed M.

    Well, I don't know what IBM's intentions are for the rest of the Intel line, but it seems pretty clear that they're out to squash the Itanic. How would you guys interpret this little snippet:







    That was taken from here: IBM plots road ahead with Power5



    Now If Itanic dies, that leaves Intel strapped with the old monkey of x86 competing with AMD once again - that can't be good for them. Just how long does Intel expect to be saddled (hindered?) with such an architecture? It's obvious that Itanic was supposed to mark a turning point *away* from x86. With all the uncertainty, it really does look as if the Wintelon world will be stuck with x86 for a very, very, very looooong time. If that's the case then I see PowerPC advancing even further as time progresses. Say what you will, but it appears that the Wintelon camp has painted itself into a corner. Anyone disagree?



    --

    Ed




    With his reference to the Itanium, I assumed he meant the one that his engineers had, not the Itanium in general.
  • Reply 98 of 182
    bartobarto Posts: 2,246member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Nevyn



    With the 604, IBM made the chip, and it was useful, but it was superceded by the Power3/4's....





    IBM still (has to) use the 604e in their PowerPC workstations. The POWER chips run are too expensive, and are server not workstation oriented... RS/6000



    All the more reason for IBM to develop the 970.



    Barto
  • Reply 99 of 182
    ed m.ed m. Posts: 222member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Bigc

    With his reference to the Itanium, I assumed he meant the one that his engineers had, not the Itanium in general.



    Um, why would that matter and what would be the difference? I mean surely they aren't that obsessed with producing a machine that could *off* some particular Itanic box they might be tinkering with.... Nah, I'd have to say they meant it in general, since Itanic is their competition and they know that Intel is betting the house on it.



    One thing seems quite certain and that's the notion that x86 is going to be the mainstay in the Wintelon world for *at least* the next 10 years, given the fact that Yamhill (x86) is Intel's answer to AMD if AMD's x86 chips take off and Itanic withers...



    I guess what I'm trying to say is that it looks as if it's going to be a "support and compatibility nightmare" for the Wintelon camp. Just consider all the *forks* with regard to processor architecture, Operating System compatibility, developer support, application compatibility, driver support and compatibility ... the list goes on. In short, I just don't see developers supporting multiple drivers and applications software for two (or more) VERY different hardware architectures so they can function under the SAME Operating System (i.e., Windows).



    Imagine how many versions of Windows there might need to be... Imagine if Autodesk (AutoCAD) or Adobe et. al. had to bring their wares to the same OS that just happens to be running on completely different hardware. Imagine the confusion for users. Imagine.... You get the picture.



    --

    Ed
  • Reply 100 of 182
    shawkshawk Posts: 116member
    Custom 64bit Intel chip for Apple w/ Altavec. Options.
Sign In or Register to comment.