I really havn't followed the Smeagol-threads but considering these new rumors I really hope that someone made the connection between Smeagol and "The Two Towers", ie 222 and 666.
I really havn't followed the Smeagol-threads but considering these new rumors I really hope that someone made the connection between Smeagol and "The Two Towers", ie 222 and 666.
Interesting discussion, guys! In most cases you're interpretation of the specs goes far beyond mine. I'm not a hardware guru, I only know a few of them.
A few clarifications are in order:
I've no idea of the pricing and marketing of these towers. None. I should probably not have said whether one mobo or the other was "below" or "above" the current lineup, that was merely speculation on my part (and some of the source(s)). I doubt Apple would leave a "hole" in the lineup. There are a variety of PPC 970 clock speeds being tested with these mobos, and based on these tests it's apparent that even the 222 mobo-based towers will offer performance of a magnitude hitherto unrealized in the Mac world. Performance of the 666-based towers is absurd.
I don't know which clock speeds Apple will end up using, and I can't reveal the one's tested. The test results are interesting to say the least, but again those will have to remain secret.
All I know relates to the two mobo designs. Maybe there is a third, but if so it's being developed on a different track from the other two.
It should be fine if I reveal one more feature of the 666 mobo: it will have a 2 channel RAID chipset built right into the board that supports bootable RAID disks. Sorry I think I bungled the ATA specs in these posts, but like I said I'm not a hardware guru. The number of drives is right (from the source's mouth), but I couldn't quite keep up with the rest, and I can't exactly ask him to slow down while I write everything down. There was lots of talk about how elegantly Apple joined the RAID with the Serial ATA, but it's over my head.
Another feature? The audio chipset gets a boost in it's mobo real estate, on both mobo designs.
Wrong. Serial ATA has support for more drives than can fit inside an average server case, per channel.
Also, I see nothing in this "info" which hasn't be speculated by other members of this board.
Barto
Perhaps you mean per controller, because S-ATA currently only allows for one device per channel. I know S-ATA "II" allows for daisy-chaining, but that's still far, far down the timeline.
Interesting discussion, guys! In most cases you're interpretation of the specs goes far beyond mine. I'm not a hardware guru, I only know a few of them.
A few clarifications are in order:
I've no idea of the pricing and marketing of these towers. None. I should probably not have said whether one mobo or the other was "below" or "above" the current lineup, that was merely speculation on my part (and some of the source(s)). I doubt Apple would leave a "hole" in the lineup. There are a variety of PPC 970 clock speeds being tested with these mobos, and based on these tests it's apparent that even the 222 mobo-based towers will offer performance of a magnitude hitherto unrealized in the Mac world. Performance of the 666-based towers is absurd.
I don't know which clock speeds Apple will end up using, and I can't reveal the one's tested. The test results are interesting to say the least, but again those will have to remain secret.
All I know relates to the two mobo designs. Maybe there is a third, but if so it's being developed on a different track from the other two.
It should be fine if I reveal one more feature of the 666 mobo: it will have a 2 channel RAID chipset built right into the board that supports bootable RAID disks. Sorry I think I bungled the ATA specs in these posts, but like I said I'm not a hardware guru. The number of drives is right (from the source's mouth), but I couldn't quite keep up with the rest, and I can't exactly ask him to slow down while I write everything down. There was lots of talk about how elegantly Apple joined the RAID with the Serial ATA, but it's over my head.
Another feature? The audio chipset gets a boost in it's mobo real estate, on both mobo designs.
Dapper Dan out.
ThxX dude.. If this turns out to be true, you'll be the one that lifted the spirit!
But if it turns out to be wrong.. Well... Join MOSR in Infinite graveyeard!
You can't put 6 DIMMs on a channel; the loading would be way out of spec. Think 2, maybe 3.
As others have pointed out, Serial ATA is one drive per channel. Of course, Apple could build as many channels as they want; I have no info there.
You could have 3 slots per channel, dual channel per cpu. I am not sure if the spec allows that many, but the pc mobos have been having somewhat limited success with more than one DIMM per channel in dual channel applications, but they have been working that out...perhaps Apple have also.
The '222' and '666' actually refers to the case size, in mm.
The 222 is a short, fat cube 2.
The 666 is a proper tower, looking like a couple of 222's stuck together but with extra vents.
The striking part is the depth of the cases - both only 222mm.
Wait, that would make the depth (measurement from face plate to rear of case) of the new case 3/4's of an inch more than the width (measuring across the faceplate) of the Quicksilver PM (8 inches). And a 666 would look less like two stacked 222' (which would only be 17.5" high) but more like three of them (28.25 inches).
At 26.25 inches high and 8.75 inches deep and (presumably) 8.75 inches wide, the 666 would lool like a square pencil. A top heavy pencil at that.
And at 26.25 inches high, it's perilously close to the same height of most desks (30 inches). Add the thickness of the desktop itself, throw in a keyboard shelf or drawer and your box is too high to fit under the desk.
Wait, that would make the depth (measurement from face plate to rear of case) of the new case 3/4's of an inch more than the width (measuring across the faceplate) of the Quicksilver PM (8 inches)...
Go back to the original post, the "222" and "666" specs have nothing to do with the size of the boxes.
If someone started a discussion with the words, "Here is my idea for what Apple should build," it would not get near the response we see here. This may be a cleaver way to get a hot discussion going on an idea for the Power Mac lineup. Are we to believe that someone who never posted here before wishes to reveal some inside information to us? Maybe Appleinsider was picked because it seemed to have the most intelligent folks in the discussions? Well, I guess it could be. I tend to be gullible myself. By looking at Dapper Dan's profile, however, I think he is having fun with us. If someone was serious, I think the information would be less flippant; disguised but accurate.
Moki said the information was half true. I wish we knew whether this referred to just the part that Moki quoted, or whether it applied to the entire posting. Moki did say it would be heavy, and before that he commented about needing weight training or something.
Actually, I hope the split in the Power Mac lineup is true. The small one with two PCI slots could still be made with a dual 970, for the top end model, which makes more sense than a 444 model.
If that's all you know then you know nothing at all.
The design and pre-press industries are not moving to X en masse for many reasons, a small factor in that in a native XPress.
And can you stop saying "quark", that's the name of the company, the product we're talking about is XPress or Passport.
Hey Clive, I don't mean to start a flame war, but you often come across as VERY holier than thou, like you're the only pro user or pre-press expert on these boards. I worked at an award winning design house with some of the biggest clients in Hollywood, and the ONLY thing holding back an OS X migration was a OS X native Quark. Perhaps your experience in the UK has been different, but Quark 6.0 is a HUGE deal.
And everybody at every level calls it Quark. Only the marketing weenies ever utter the word XPress.
I really havn't followed the Smeagol-threads but considering these new rumors I really hope that someone made the connection between Smeagol and "The Two Towers", ie 222 and 666.
Yeah, and the connection between Smeagol and "The Fellowship of the Ring" and "The Return of the King" is what, exactly?
Comments
Quark 6.0 will save our souls
That's right. It will certainly save Apples!
Relax. Take it easy. Train with a wise master. Paint a fence.
Lemon Bon Bon
PS. KeyboardF12. You called it.
Originally posted by Henriok
I really havn't followed the Smeagol-threads but considering these new rumors I really hope that someone made the connection between Smeagol and "The Two Towers", ie 222 and 666.
lol, never thought of that. That's funny.
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
From Clive:
That's right. It will certainly save Apples!
Relax. Take it easy. Train with a wise master. Paint a fence.
Lemon Bon Bon
PS. KeyboardF12. You called it.
Oh god.. Go to sleep!!
Originally posted by hmurchison
You want to suprise me tell me how Apple plans to offer Audio I/O. That's more of a darkhorse than any of these other technologies.
toslink
toslink
nice. this should shut up my audio friend since this means at least 5.1 will be supported(?)
A few clarifications are in order:
I've no idea of the pricing and marketing of these towers. None. I should probably not have said whether one mobo or the other was "below" or "above" the current lineup, that was merely speculation on my part (and some of the source(s)). I doubt Apple would leave a "hole" in the lineup. There are a variety of PPC 970 clock speeds being tested with these mobos, and based on these tests it's apparent that even the 222 mobo-based towers will offer performance of a magnitude hitherto unrealized in the Mac world. Performance of the 666-based towers is absurd.
I don't know which clock speeds Apple will end up using, and I can't reveal the one's tested. The test results are interesting to say the least, but again those will have to remain secret.
All I know relates to the two mobo designs. Maybe there is a third, but if so it's being developed on a different track from the other two.
It should be fine if I reveal one more feature of the 666 mobo: it will have a 2 channel RAID chipset built right into the board that supports bootable RAID disks. Sorry I think I bungled the ATA specs in these posts, but like I said I'm not a hardware guru. The number of drives is right (from the source's mouth), but I couldn't quite keep up with the rest, and I can't exactly ask him to slow down while I write everything down. There was lots of talk about how elegantly Apple joined the RAID with the Serial ATA, but it's over my head.
Another feature? The audio chipset gets a boost in it's mobo real estate, on both mobo designs.
Dapper Dan out.
Originally posted by Barto
Wrong. Serial ATA has support for more drives than can fit inside an average server case, per channel.
Also, I see nothing in this "info" which hasn't be speculated by other members of this board.
Barto
Perhaps you mean per controller, because S-ATA currently only allows for one device per channel. I know S-ATA "II" allows for daisy-chaining, but that's still far, far down the timeline.
Originally posted by Dapper Dan
Interesting discussion, guys! In most cases you're interpretation of the specs goes far beyond mine. I'm not a hardware guru, I only know a few of them.
A few clarifications are in order:
I've no idea of the pricing and marketing of these towers. None. I should probably not have said whether one mobo or the other was "below" or "above" the current lineup, that was merely speculation on my part (and some of the source(s)). I doubt Apple would leave a "hole" in the lineup. There are a variety of PPC 970 clock speeds being tested with these mobos, and based on these tests it's apparent that even the 222 mobo-based towers will offer performance of a magnitude hitherto unrealized in the Mac world. Performance of the 666-based towers is absurd.
I don't know which clock speeds Apple will end up using, and I can't reveal the one's tested. The test results are interesting to say the least, but again those will have to remain secret.
All I know relates to the two mobo designs. Maybe there is a third, but if so it's being developed on a different track from the other two.
It should be fine if I reveal one more feature of the 666 mobo: it will have a 2 channel RAID chipset built right into the board that supports bootable RAID disks. Sorry I think I bungled the ATA specs in these posts, but like I said I'm not a hardware guru. The number of drives is right (from the source's mouth), but I couldn't quite keep up with the rest, and I can't exactly ask him to slow down while I write everything down. There was lots of talk about how elegantly Apple joined the RAID with the Serial ATA, but it's over my head.
Another feature? The audio chipset gets a boost in it's mobo real estate, on both mobo designs.
Dapper Dan out.
ThxX dude.. If this turns out to be true, you'll be the one that lifted the spirit!
But if it turns out to be wrong.. Well... Join MOSR in Infinite graveyeard!
Originally posted by wmf
You can't put 6 DIMMs on a channel; the loading would be way out of spec. Think 2, maybe 3.
As others have pointed out, Serial ATA is one drive per channel. Of course, Apple could build as many channels as they want; I have no info there.
You could have 3 slots per channel, dual channel per cpu. I am not sure if the spec allows that many, but the pc mobos have been having somewhat limited success with more than one DIMM per channel in dual channel applications, but they have been working that out...perhaps Apple have also.
Originally posted by bih
I don't understand the motive for people with real inside information to post it a newsgroup. Anyone care to explain?
I personally think it just very hard on occassion to keep a secret...
What good is a secret if you can't share it
Originally posted by lucida
The '222' and '666' actually refers to the case size, in mm.
The 222 is a short, fat cube 2.
The 666 is a proper tower, looking like a couple of 222's stuck together but with extra vents.
The striking part is the depth of the cases - both only 222mm.
Wait, that would make the depth (measurement from face plate to rear of case) of the new case 3/4's of an inch more than the width (measuring across the faceplate) of the Quicksilver PM (8 inches). And a 666 would look less like two stacked 222' (which would only be 17.5" high) but more like three of them (28.25 inches).
At 26.25 inches high and 8.75 inches deep and (presumably) 8.75 inches wide, the 666 would lool like a square pencil. A top heavy pencil at that.
And at 26.25 inches high, it's perilously close to the same height of most desks (30 inches). Add the thickness of the desktop itself, throw in a keyboard shelf or drawer and your box is too high to fit under the desk.
Originally posted by keyboardf12
all i know is that the number one reason why creative / ad agencies are not moving to OSX is quark.
If that's all you know then you know nothing at all.
The design and pre-press industries are not moving to X en masse for many reasons, a small factor in that in a native XPress.
And can you stop saying "quark", that's the name of the company, the product we're talking about is XPress or Passport.
Originally posted by bih
I don't understand the motive for people with real inside information to post it a newsgroup. Anyone care to explain?
http://www.dapperdanfarm.com/
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
Wait, that would make the depth (measurement from face plate to rear of case) of the new case 3/4's of an inch more than the width (measuring across the faceplate) of the Quicksilver PM (8 inches)...
Go back to the original post, the "222" and "666" specs have nothing to do with the size of the boxes.
Moki said the information was half true. I wish we knew whether this referred to just the part that Moki quoted, or whether it applied to the entire posting. Moki did say it would be heavy, and before that he commented about needing weight training or something.
Actually, I hope the split in the Power Mac lineup is true. The small one with two PCI slots could still be made with a dual 970, for the top end model, which makes more sense than a 444 model.
Originally posted by Clive
If that's all you know then you know nothing at all.
The design and pre-press industries are not moving to X en masse for many reasons, a small factor in that in a native XPress.
And can you stop saying "quark", that's the name of the company, the product we're talking about is XPress or Passport.
Hey Clive, I don't mean to start a flame war, but you often come across as VERY holier than thou, like you're the only pro user or pre-press expert on these boards. I worked at an award winning design house with some of the biggest clients in Hollywood, and the ONLY thing holding back an OS X migration was a OS X native Quark. Perhaps your experience in the UK has been different, but Quark 6.0 is a HUGE deal.
And everybody at every level calls it Quark. Only the marketing weenies ever utter the word XPress.
Originally posted by Henriok
I really havn't followed the Smeagol-threads but considering these new rumors I really hope that someone made the connection between Smeagol and "The Two Towers", ie 222 and 666.
Yeah, and the connection between Smeagol and "The Fellowship of the Ring" and "The Return of the King" is what, exactly?