"Because MOL runs natively on the processor, its developers say that it works very fast. There's another benefit, too -- MOL running Mac OS 8.6 or later doesn't require a ROM image to work."<hr></blockquote>
<strong>I find it very hard to believe that Mot's customers don't want DDR, given the dramatic price drop of DDR relative to SDR and it's better power consumption characteristics. DDR, it consumes less power and it doesn't cost more than SDR. In fact, at some point next year DDR will probably start to retail cheaper than SDR as most memory fabs reduce their SDR production.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is really a short sighted comment.
Given that MPX is a very efficient bus, an increase to 166mhz ( as in the new powermacs ) may allow for the use of the bandwidth available from DDR memory. I havent seen any memory bandwidth benchmarks from the new powermacs, so I can say how close they are coming to DDR PC's.
The memory does not connect directly to the bus. Mot's customers use memory controllers ( either on chip, or seperately ). Those memory controllers can support DDR ( see Apple ), if it is in the interest of the company to do so ( low power and low price being key ). It really doesnt matter whether or not people think they are a hack. MPX doesnt specify the memory bus. If DDR is cheaper, or the lower power requirements lead to lower costs ( and thats about all that matters in the embedded markets that use PPC chips ), then DDR will be used.
Split hairs if you wish, but the fact remains that even very cheap memory handily outruns Mot's fastest FSB, and, given the choice, even embedded customers would want a FSB that more fully saturates the CPU, or, especially, a smaller process that consumes less power at any given speed. You can still get decent performance out of the G4 plus MPX but you need a big honking cache to get it. That costs. Now since DDR doesn't cost any more than SDR, and the L3 costs quite a lot, I'm pretty sure a lot of customers would rather attach a fast memory bus to a fast FSB and forego the expense of L3.
A faster FSB and a smaller process (thus cooler and more efficient) G4? Moto, can we get one? Nope. They suck, and you know it.
Hmmm. How long before Apple squash the 'PPC Linux OSX'? Can they?
Looks exciting. So, EVEN if, IF Apple didn't go down the Powerlite route, in theory...you could by a Power machine that could run 'X' in emulation faster than Apple's current pro line up!?!? Thoughts?
Amorph. Credit where its due. That was a good post.
<strong>Split hairs if you wish, but the fact remains that even very cheap memory handily outruns Mot's fastest FSB, and, given the choice, even embedded customers would want a FSB that more fully saturates the CPU, or, especially, a smaller process that consumes less power at any given speed. You can still get decent performance out of the G4 plus MPX but you need a big honking cache to get it. That costs. Now since DDR doesn't cost any more than SDR, and the L3 costs quite a lot, I'm pretty sure a lot of customers would rather attach a fast memory bus to a fast FSB and forego the expense of L3.
A faster FSB and a smaller process (thus cooler and more efficient) G4? Moto, can we get one? Nope. They suck, and you know it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Has it occured to you that a DDR MPX may not be a good solution to the memory bandwidth problem? There could be all sorts of technical reasons why it just doesn't make sense to extend MPX as opposed to going to a completely new bus that has much longer legs... i.e. RapidIO. The benefits of a DDR MPX bus are likely far less than you expect whereas RapidIO (or Apple Pi) has a great deal of potential beyond to grow beyond DDR333. Why waste the money developing an expensive to implement bus that is just going to replaced soon anyhow?
And as for the Linux/MacOSX "emulator": Apple needn't be concerned about it. I haven't looked closely at their license for the OS but it could be written such that it must be run on Apple hardware. This would be enough to prevent widespread sales, and that's what might hurt Apple -- the odd guy in a back room cobbling something together to run OS X probably wouldn't have bought a Mac anyhow, and now he might actually buy the OS and some software to run on it thus increasing software sales. Linux isn't going to make it as a consumer desktop OS and so it will be remain a geek-oriented OS, which is quite a small market. Since both Linux and MacOS now share a Unix heritage there will be an increase in the amount of software developed & ported to the Mac. The Linux & Mac worlds can now be allies against The Evil Empire.
After the 'stalled' recent 'update' to the bus and mhz, I'm kinda hoping that a 7500 on true DDR Rio is a given for Jan'. The 'G5'. Or the G4's finest hour.
Hmm. The G4 waving a promising goodbye just as it had started...so promisingly all those years ago...before the 'PowerGPUL' takes over the 'Power'Mac in the Summer?
Now that it's scaling, and since it's designed as an embedded processor, it'll be ready to power Apple's consumer and portable lines well for a good while, until the G5 is on a small enough process to run in a notebook, and we're all looking forward to the G6.
Comments
On MacCentral
<a href="http://maccentral.macworld.com/"; target="_blank">http://maccentral.macworld.com/</a>;
[quote]Mac-on-Linux supports Mac OS X (including Jaguar)
by Peter Cohen, [email protected]
September 7, 2002 12:00 pm ET
"Because MOL runs natively on the processor, its developers say that it works very fast. There's another benefit, too -- MOL running Mac OS 8.6 or later doesn't require a ROM image to work."<hr></blockquote>
<strong>I find it very hard to believe that Mot's customers don't want DDR, given the dramatic price drop of DDR relative to SDR and it's better power consumption characteristics. DDR, it consumes less power and it doesn't cost more than SDR. In fact, at some point next year DDR will probably start to retail cheaper than SDR as most memory fabs reduce their SDR production.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is really a short sighted comment.
Given that MPX is a very efficient bus, an increase to 166mhz ( as in the new powermacs ) may allow for the use of the bandwidth available from DDR memory. I havent seen any memory bandwidth benchmarks from the new powermacs, so I can say how close they are coming to DDR PC's.
The memory does not connect directly to the bus. Mot's customers use memory controllers ( either on chip, or seperately ). Those memory controllers can support DDR ( see Apple ), if it is in the interest of the company to do so ( low power and low price being key ). It really doesnt matter whether or not people think they are a hack. MPX doesnt specify the memory bus. If DDR is cheaper, or the lower power requirements lead to lower costs ( and thats about all that matters in the embedded markets that use PPC chips ), then DDR will be used.
A faster FSB and a smaller process (thus cooler and more efficient) G4? Moto, can we get one? Nope. They suck, and you know it.
"you two ought to get married "
You're only jealous
Now, shut the %$£% up before I bitch slap you back down to two words you four word wonder!
Lemon Bon Bon
Looks exciting. So, EVEN if, IF Apple didn't go down the Powerlite route, in theory...you could by a Power machine that could run 'X' in emulation faster than Apple's current pro line up!?!? Thoughts?
Amorph. Credit where its due. That was a good post.
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>Posted by BigC***
"you two ought to get married "
You're only jealous
Now, shut the %$£% up before I bitch slap you back down to two words you four word wonder!
Lemon Bon Bon</strong><hr></blockquote>
boy your right on the ball motor mouth
<strong>Split hairs if you wish, but the fact remains that even very cheap memory handily outruns Mot's fastest FSB, and, given the choice, even embedded customers would want a FSB that more fully saturates the CPU, or, especially, a smaller process that consumes less power at any given speed. You can still get decent performance out of the G4 plus MPX but you need a big honking cache to get it. That costs. Now since DDR doesn't cost any more than SDR, and the L3 costs quite a lot, I'm pretty sure a lot of customers would rather attach a fast memory bus to a fast FSB and forego the expense of L3.
A faster FSB and a smaller process (thus cooler and more efficient) G4? Moto, can we get one? Nope. They suck, and you know it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Has it occured to you that a DDR MPX may not be a good solution to the memory bandwidth problem? There could be all sorts of technical reasons why it just doesn't make sense to extend MPX as opposed to going to a completely new bus that has much longer legs... i.e. RapidIO. The benefits of a DDR MPX bus are likely far less than you expect whereas RapidIO (or Apple Pi) has a great deal of potential beyond to grow beyond DDR333. Why waste the money developing an expensive to implement bus that is just going to replaced soon anyhow?
And as for the Linux/MacOSX "emulator": Apple needn't be concerned about it. I haven't looked closely at their license for the OS but it could be written such that it must be run on Apple hardware. This would be enough to prevent widespread sales, and that's what might hurt Apple -- the odd guy in a back room cobbling something together to run OS X probably wouldn't have bought a Mac anyhow, and now he might actually buy the OS and some software to run on it thus increasing software sales. Linux isn't going to make it as a consumer desktop OS and so it will be remain a geek-oriented OS, which is quite a small market. Since both Linux and MacOS now share a Unix heritage there will be an increase in the amount of software developed & ported to the Mac. The Linux & Mac worlds can now be allies against The Evil Empire.
After the 'stalled' recent 'update' to the bus and mhz, I'm kinda hoping that a 7500 on true DDR Rio is a given for Jan'. The 'G5'. Or the G4's finest hour.
Hmm. The G4 waving a promising goodbye just as it had started...so promisingly all those years ago...before the 'PowerGPUL' takes over the 'Power'Mac in the Summer?
Lemon Bon Bon
Now that it's scaling, and since it's designed as an embedded processor, it'll be ready to power Apple's consumer and portable lines well for a good while, until the G5 is on a small enough process to run in a notebook, and we're all looking forward to the G6.