Sure they have, Some guy went to this forum at some point. Saw a new machine was shipping next week. (Just as he was walking out to buy a new $5000 mac setup)
He waited a week and had lower blood pressure. The end.
Anyone in Future Hardware criticising a hypothesis about Future Hardware should probably go to Apple Outsider.
That seems to be a pretty silly position to put yourself in - hypothesising that the next generation of Apple machines will continue to use a G4 is just as valid as stating that they will use a 970 - given some argument to back each one up.
My understanding is that this forum isn't for wild speculation, but discussion of the available facts. In this case the available facts are that 970 and Power4 support are in/are going to be in GCC - that doesn't mean that Apple put that support there or that Apple will use the 970. As I already wrote a plausible explanation is that IBM sponsored this to further their Linux ambitions.
I think it's very unlikely that Apple will use the Power4 in the foreseeable future - no one seems to be claiming that they will on the basis of this document anyway.
While I think there's good odds on the 970, there's nothing in this doc that says APPle is going to use it. As BRAD notes, IBM is using Linux, so they are going to want GCC to compile for their chips - the Power4 and the 970.
Anything other than that is extrapolation well beyond the facts.
Yeah and IBM is putting Altivec on the 970 chips for fun and they figure what the hell, why don't we stick Altivec in the GCC code for them Linux guys too, right.
Well, the reality is that there was no spoon, no matter what you think you see.
Not such a good quote I think.
Spooooon!
Sure there is. Philosophers agree, there is a reality (the numa) undelying perception despite the fact that we may not be capable of comprehending it. Yes, Virginia, there is a PPC970.
Sure there is. Philosophers agree, there is a reality (the numa) undelying perception despite the fact that we may not be capable of comprehending it. Yes, Virginia, there is a PPC970.
... actually, the moment you successfully communicate the idea that reality is not comprehensible, you instantly disprove yourself: since your idea - being a part of reality too - has just been comprehended.
Sure there is. Philosophers agree, there is a reality (the numa) undelying perception despite the fact that we may not be capable of comprehending it. Yes, Virginia, there is a PPC970.
Now that is interesting. Reality is "the numa"? Does this mean that Apple's new machines will support Non-Uniform Memory Access?
not to protect brad, as he could do that quite well without me, but he did not say that the G4 would stay in the PM, nor did he say that the 970 would not be used in the PM...he merely stated that the GCC alone doesn't mean that apple will use the 970....it is my understanding that IBM would have to do the GCC code for the power4 and the 970 if it wanted to use either with linux...now having altivec makes it more interesting...and if apple itself is doing the GCC and not IBM i think that would tell volumes....but having the GCC for the 970 by itself is just one more fun little fact that could ultimately blow any which way in the wind....
of course knowing that panther is coming, knowing that apple is moving the os to 64 bit, knowing that the 970 supports 64 bit, knowing that IBM threw altivec on the 970, knowing that apple is the only company using altivec, knowing that apple needs a faster chip like a dwarf needs stilts to dance with elle macpherson....well, i do think we shall see it sooner than later
While I think there's good odds on the 970, there's nothing in this doc that says APPle is going to use it. As BRAD notes, IBM is using Linux, so they are going to want GCC to compile for their chips - the Power4 and the 970.
Anything other than that is extrapolation well beyond the facts.
I happen to agree with this statement. You do say, "I think there's good odds on the 970 . . ." Most others should also agree with that. Now, as we are trying to piece together clues about Apple's use of the 970, you simply point out that this document is not a good clue. BRAD seems to agree.
Possibly none of the clues mean a lot by themselves, but the sheer number of little clues seems to be compelling.
I happen to agree with this statement. You do say, "I think there's good odds on the 970 . . ." Most others should also agree with that. Now, as we are trying to piece together clues about Apple's use of the 970, you simply point out that this document is not a good clue. BRAD seems to agree.
Possibly none of the clues mean a lot by themselves, but the sheer number of little clues seems to be compelling.
...so, the only facts are IBM makes PPC chips, Apple make computers that use PPC chips, Apple uses Altivec in many of their programs, IBM added Altivec in their PPC chips, GCC code is used to compile programs for Apple chips, GCC has been upgraded to include IBM PPC 970 chips and altivec, so, therefore, Apple will not use IBM PPC970 chips; strange logic around here.
...so, the only facts are IBM makes PPC chips, Apple make computers that use PPC chips, Apple uses Altivec in many of their programs, IBM added Altivec in their PPC chips, GCC code is used to compile programs for Apple chips, GCC has been upgraded to include IBM PPC 970 chips and altivec, so, therefore, Apple will not use IBM PPC970 chips; strange logic around here.
". . . therefore, Apple will not use IBM PPC970 chips." Who said that? I was pointing out that each clue by itself may not be very significant, but when we have so many clues it makes a compelling case that Apple will use the 970. I have no doubts myself, and was pointing out that even Clive said, "I think there's good odds on the 970 . . ."
Ok, let's get this straight. The spoon reference is to a scene in The Matrix in which a kid is seen bending spoons. "Neo" has a go and gets nowhere. But the extra-smart kid says the the key to bending the spoons is that "there is no spoon".
IE, the whole thing is an illusion of The Matrix, a deception of the mind.
So, if one tries to draw an analogy with "spoons" and 970s then the whole thing is going to fail because the established "fact" is that there is no spoon - therefore there is no 970 either.
Yeah and IBM is putting Altivec on the 970 chips for fun and they figure what the hell, why don't we stick Altivec in the GCC code for them Linux guys too, right.
Well, yes, the evidence is exactly that.
We "know" that AltiVec is in the 970. But that's a completely different "fact" from knowing that Apple is going to use the 970. It's a good indicator, but that's all.
GCC supporting the 970 and AltiVec is obvious - why would IBM release a chip with no compiler support. Additionally AltiVec is in the G4 - so GCC would need AltiVec support for both the G4 and the 970 anyway.
There's no tie to Apple between noting that there is 970 support in GCC (there's also Power4 support - but no one's claiming Apple's going to use that, are they?). Do you have some other data that says something else?
So, without an Apple reference, all this says is that GCC will properly support a couple of IBM chips.
knowing that apple is the only company using altivec...
Is that true?
Sure, Microsoft aren't using it, but other people are buying and using G4s (don't the 8500 series Motorola chips also have AltiVec?) - how can we say conclusively that they aren't using AltiVec?
. . . IE, the whole thing is an illusion of The Matrix, a deception of the mind.
So, if one tries to draw an analogy with "spoons" and 970s then the whole thing is going to fail because the established "fact" is that there is no spoon - therefore there is no 970 either.
Moki said, "Well, in this case, there is indeed a spoon." I see this as saying, unlike the Matrix, there is a spoon in this case. He is saying the 970 spoon is real. He may even be hinting that the 970 is mind bending?
...so, the only facts are IBM makes PPC chips, Apple make computers that use PPC chips, Apple uses Altivec in many of their programs, IBM added Altivec in their PPC chips, GCC code is used to compile programs for Apple chips, GCC has been upgraded to include IBM PPC 970 chips and altivec, so, therefore, Apple will not use IBM PPC970 chips; strange logic around here.
No, the logic is: IBM makes PPC chips, some of those chips use AltiVec, one of the customers for the AltiVec chips micght be Apple, Apple isn't the only buyer of AltiVec powered chips, MacOS isn't the only OS to run on those AltiVec chips, IBM is pushing Linux, IBM needs a Linux compiler to take advantage of its PPC chips (AltiVec and otherwise) on whatever platforms it delivers to...
IBM could be involved to get stuff running for Linux and/or other platforms, IBM could be involved to get stuff running for MacOS, it could be both.
I think it could well be both. But I don't think that this gives us much of a hint either way.
If I might add something else to think about. GCC supports x86, that doesn't mean that Apple is adopting Intel.
Comments
Future Hardware has never done anything good for anyone
He waited a week and had lower blood pressure. The end.
Originally posted by bunge
Anyone in Future Hardware criticising a hypothesis about Future Hardware should probably go to Apple Outsider.
That seems to be a pretty silly position to put yourself in - hypothesising that the next generation of Apple machines will continue to use a G4 is just as valid as stating that they will use a 970 - given some argument to back each one up.
My understanding is that this forum isn't for wild speculation, but discussion of the available facts. In this case the available facts are that 970 and Power4 support are in/are going to be in GCC - that doesn't mean that Apple put that support there or that Apple will use the 970. As I already wrote a plausible explanation is that IBM sponsored this to further their Linux ambitions.
I think it's very unlikely that Apple will use the Power4 in the foreseeable future - no one seems to be claiming that they will on the basis of this document anyway.
Originally posted by moki
Well, in this case, there is indeed a spoon.
Well, the reality is that there was no spoon, no matter what you think you see.
Not such a good quote I think.
Originally posted by Clive
My understanding is that this forum isn't for wild speculation, but discussion of the available facts.
That sounds like fun
Originally posted by Clive
While I think there's good odds on the 970, there's nothing in this doc that says APPle is going to use it. As BRAD notes, IBM is using Linux, so they are going to want GCC to compile for their chips - the Power4 and the 970.
Anything other than that is extrapolation well beyond the facts.
Yeah and IBM is putting Altivec on the 970 chips for fun and they figure what the hell, why don't we stick Altivec in the GCC code for them Linux guys too, right.
Originally posted by Clive
Well, the reality is that there was no spoon, no matter what you think you see.
Not such a good quote I think.
Spooooon!
Sure there is. Philosophers agree, there is a reality (the numa) undelying perception despite the fact that we may not be capable of comprehending it. Yes, Virginia, there is a PPC970.
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
Spooooon!
Sure there is. Philosophers agree, there is a reality (the numa) undelying perception despite the fact that we may not be capable of comprehending it. Yes, Virginia, there is a PPC970.
... actually, the moment you successfully communicate the idea that reality is not comprehensible, you instantly disprove yourself: since your idea - being a part of reality too - has just been comprehended.
You're Welcome.
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
Spooooon!
Sure there is. Philosophers agree, there is a reality (the numa) undelying perception despite the fact that we may not be capable of comprehending it. Yes, Virginia, there is a PPC970.
Now that is interesting. Reality is "the numa"? Does this mean that Apple's new machines will support Non-Uniform Memory Access?
of course knowing that panther is coming, knowing that apple is moving the os to 64 bit, knowing that the 970 supports 64 bit, knowing that IBM threw altivec on the 970, knowing that apple is the only company using altivec, knowing that apple needs a faster chip like a dwarf needs stilts to dance with elle macpherson....well, i do think we shall see it sooner than later
g
programmer, please correct all my factual errors
moki, please PM me all your inside info
brad, please order me a sub and a soda
god i love power
Originally posted by Clive
While I think there's good odds on the 970, there's nothing in this doc that says APPle is going to use it. As BRAD notes, IBM is using Linux, so they are going to want GCC to compile for their chips - the Power4 and the 970.
Anything other than that is extrapolation well beyond the facts.
I happen to agree with this statement. You do say, "I think there's good odds on the 970 . . ." Most others should also agree with that. Now, as we are trying to piece together clues about Apple's use of the 970, you simply point out that this document is not a good clue. BRAD seems to agree.
Possibly none of the clues mean a lot by themselves, but the sheer number of little clues seems to be compelling.
Originally posted by snoopy
I happen to agree with this statement. You do say, "I think there's good odds on the 970 . . ." Most others should also agree with that. Now, as we are trying to piece together clues about Apple's use of the 970, you simply point out that this document is not a good clue. BRAD seems to agree.
Possibly none of the clues mean a lot by themselves, but the sheer number of little clues seems to be compelling.
...so, the only facts are IBM makes PPC chips, Apple make computers that use PPC chips, Apple uses Altivec in many of their programs, IBM added Altivec in their PPC chips, GCC code is used to compile programs for Apple chips, GCC has been upgraded to include IBM PPC 970 chips and altivec, so, therefore, Apple will not use IBM PPC970 chips; strange logic around here.
Originally posted by Bigc
...so, the only facts are IBM makes PPC chips, Apple make computers that use PPC chips, Apple uses Altivec in many of their programs, IBM added Altivec in their PPC chips, GCC code is used to compile programs for Apple chips, GCC has been upgraded to include IBM PPC 970 chips and altivec, so, therefore, Apple will not use IBM PPC970 chips; strange logic around here.
". . . therefore, Apple will not use IBM PPC970 chips." Who said that? I was pointing out that each clue by itself may not be very significant, but when we have so many clues it makes a compelling case that Apple will use the 970. I have no doubts myself, and was pointing out that even Clive said, "I think there's good odds on the 970 . . ."
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
Spooooon!
Sure there is...
Ok, let's get this straight. The spoon reference is to a scene in The Matrix in which a kid is seen bending spoons. "Neo" has a go and gets nowhere. But the extra-smart kid says the the key to bending the spoons is that "there is no spoon".
IE, the whole thing is an illusion of The Matrix, a deception of the mind.
So, if one tries to draw an analogy with "spoons" and 970s then the whole thing is going to fail because the established "fact" is that there is no spoon - therefore there is no 970 either.
Originally posted by Bigc
Yeah and IBM is putting Altivec on the 970 chips for fun and they figure what the hell, why don't we stick Altivec in the GCC code for them Linux guys too, right.
Well, yes, the evidence is exactly that.
We "know" that AltiVec is in the 970. But that's a completely different "fact" from knowing that Apple is going to use the 970. It's a good indicator, but that's all.
GCC supporting the 970 and AltiVec is obvious - why would IBM release a chip with no compiler support. Additionally AltiVec is in the G4 - so GCC would need AltiVec support for both the G4 and the 970 anyway.
There's no tie to Apple between noting that there is 970 support in GCC (there's also Power4 support - but no one's claiming Apple's going to use that, are they?). Do you have some other data that says something else?
So, without an Apple reference, all this says is that GCC will properly support a couple of IBM chips.
Originally posted by thegelding
knowing that apple is the only company using altivec...
Is that true?
Sure, Microsoft aren't using it, but other people are buying and using G4s (don't the 8500 series Motorola chips also have AltiVec?) - how can we say conclusively that they aren't using AltiVec?
Originally posted by Clive
. . . IE, the whole thing is an illusion of The Matrix, a deception of the mind.
So, if one tries to draw an analogy with "spoons" and 970s then the whole thing is going to fail because the established "fact" is that there is no spoon - therefore there is no 970 either.
Moki said, "Well, in this case, there is indeed a spoon." I see this as saying, unlike the Matrix, there is a spoon in this case. He is saying the 970 spoon is real. He may even be hinting that the 970 is mind bending?
Originally posted by Bigc
...so, the only facts are IBM makes PPC chips, Apple make computers that use PPC chips, Apple uses Altivec in many of their programs, IBM added Altivec in their PPC chips, GCC code is used to compile programs for Apple chips, GCC has been upgraded to include IBM PPC 970 chips and altivec, so, therefore, Apple will not use IBM PPC970 chips; strange logic around here.
No, the logic is: IBM makes PPC chips, some of those chips use AltiVec, one of the customers for the AltiVec chips micght be Apple, Apple isn't the only buyer of AltiVec powered chips, MacOS isn't the only OS to run on those AltiVec chips, IBM is pushing Linux, IBM needs a Linux compiler to take advantage of its PPC chips (AltiVec and otherwise) on whatever platforms it delivers to...
IBM could be involved to get stuff running for Linux and/or other platforms, IBM could be involved to get stuff running for MacOS, it could be both.
I think it could well be both. But I don't think that this gives us much of a hint either way.
If I might add something else to think about. GCC supports x86, that doesn't mean that Apple is adopting Intel.
970
spoon
gcc