Unless there's a multi-core 970 sitting around somewhere mysteriously, I don't see too much validity to MacDoobie's little rant this time. I could see this happening perhaps with the next iteration, the 980, based around the 980's multi-core architecture.
But who's to say Apple didn't want to impart some of the wizardry behind the Power4 über-servers from IBM into its own lineup, namely the multi-chip-module. But this couldn't go in an Xserve could it?
Meh, I don't see this happening seriously. Apple could save a lot of R/D and make some nice royalties by just licensing OS X out to IBM for them to package with their own servers.
Your also forgetting about the Cock 'n Bull off of Cattleman. Even better selection.
See what I mean about drinking with Brits...?!?
Pitcher after pitcher...
Sad thing is, I should remember the name of the place, been there at least a half dozen times in the last ten or so years... There was a pizza place there before...
I haven't been out to the new Cock 'n Bull, but I remember the old place downtown on Main... And the place before that, on Central... Central Perk, heh... Real original Howie...!
Kickaha and Amorph couldn't moderate themselves out of a paper bag. Abdicate responsibility and succumb to idiocy. Two years of letting a member make personal attacks against others, then stepping aside when someone won't put up with it. Not only that but go ahead and shut down my posting priviledges but not the one making the attacks. Not even the common decency to abide by their warning (afer three days of absorbing personal attacks with no mods in sight), just shut my posting down and then say it might happen later if a certian line is crossed. Bullshit flag is flying, I won't abide by lying and coddling of liars who go off-site, create accounts differing in a single letter from my handle with the express purpose to decieve and then claim here that I did it. Everyone be warned, kim kap sol is a lying, deceitful poster.
Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.
Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
APPLE and IBM would manufacture together machines with N processors where N will go up to 64 G5s! The project is named Dark Star in-house.
I remember reading news reports (not rumors) of IBM working on server machines with up to 64 PowerPC processors, although Power4/Power5 rather than 970 were mentioned.
Can an IBM-made Power4 or Power5 multiprocessor machine running OSX be called a Macintosh?
64 processors in the G5 case is so ridiculous that it is obviously not what the rumour is suggesting. Above there are two much more likely suggestions for what is really behind the rumour (ignoring the third "pipe dream" possibility)...
- Apple has a larger version of the case. Something wide with multiple blade-like motherboards, perhaps? Seems impractical, however.
- A cluster of G5s (or new Xserves), possibly connected by something faster than Ethernet. As Amorph noted above, I came across a note in the specs that says HyperTransport might be useable for that. Alternatively FibreChannel or FireWire3200. Given its emphasis on cooling, using the G5 in a "farm" arrangement seems reasonable. In this case the real technology here would be at the system software level to allow these machines to behave as one many-way SMP machine. Rumours about that have been floating around here for a year now.
I have no idea if there is any truth it this rumour, but given Apple's interest in 3D and the Pro market it seems to me like this is an area where Apple might try to muscle in. Potentially far more lucrative than low-margin consumer machines too. They bought all that 3D software for something, and as impressive as the new G5s are I don't see that they would be enough to wow the movie industry people like they have purportedly been wowed.
Kickaha and Amorph couldn't moderate themselves out of a paper bag. Abdicate responsibility and succumb to idiocy. Two years of letting a member make personal attacks against others, then stepping aside when someone won't put up with it. Not only that but go ahead and shut down my posting priviledges but not the one making the attacks. Not even the common decency to abide by their warning (afer three days of absorbing personal attacks with no mods in sight), just shut my posting down and then say it might happen later if a certian line is crossed. Bullshit flag is flying, I won't abide by lying and coddling of liars who go off-site, create accounts differing in a single letter from my handle with the express purpose to decieve and then claim here that I did it. Everyone be warned, kim kap sol is a lying, deceitful poster.
Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.
Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
...I came across a note in the specs that says HyperTransport might be useable for that.
I thought I remembered a 'Serialized HT' version for board-to-board level connections, but I'm missing it now. Was this what you're talking about? Is it finalized? Or a design for a "HT socket" like a PCI socket?
Quote:
Originally posted by Programmer
Alternatively FibreChannel or FireWire3200.
Likewise with the FireWire stuff. My reading is that some of the FW3200 stuff is finalized - but I don't see references to FW3200 chipsets... (and Apple probably won't ship a fiberoptic connector for things external to the box). Does anyone know of any proposed FW3200 product?
But this whole line of reasoning rocks
And remember all the rumors about 'XGrid' etc., and now Shake has cluster support that seems suspiciously similar....
Even if this only ends up being a 4-CPU box. Or an IBM-branded box that has Mac OS X Server as an option. I think this would be a net plus for Apple. Sure it sucks some R&D, but there's a LOT of people who think "All macs are REALLY slow". This would be the proverbial sledgehammer to break that mindset.
Sure it sucks some R&D, but there's a LOT of people who think "All macs are REALLY slow". This would be the proverbial sledgehammer to break that mindset.
Does it really matter since there hasn't been a Macintosh for years? We already have an Xserve, essentially a PowerMac in a different case and it doesn't have the name Mac or Macintosh anywhere yet it is immediately recognized as part of the Mac family.
I will rephrase the question then. Would an IBM-made Power4 or Power5 multiprocessor machine running OSX be sold through the Apple store or would it only be available directly from IBM?
I've been wondering about plug-n-play SMP boxes for a while now too. I remember back when the G4 came out and thinking how cool it would be to simply "cable together" a few machines and have the resources between the boxes be completely shared; as if two single CPU machines suddenly became 2 CPUs or a 2 CPU system suddenly becoming 4. All this by simply plugging some sort of cable from one machine to another. I did some searching online to see if anything of this nature already existed and came up with this:
A cluster of G5s (or new Xserves), possibly connected by something faster than Ethernet.[...] In this case the real technology here would be at the system software level to allow these machines to behave as one many-way SMP machine. Rumours about that have been floating around here for a year now.
I have no idea if there is any truth it this rumour, but given Apple's interest in 3D and the Pro market it seems to me like this is an area where Apple might try to muscle in. Potentially far more lucrative than low-margin consumer machines too.
It's also worth considering that since this kind of high-end stuff carries nice, fat margins, Apple would have a little extra room to sacrifice profit margins on consumer machines, or at least shift them more toward the retail outlet. If you want Best Buy to suddenly buy in to Macs, sweeten the profit per machine for Best Buy. They'll move.
It's also worth considering that since this kind of high-end stuff carries nice, fat margins, Apple would have a little extra room to sacrifice profit margins on consumer machines, or at least shift them more toward the retail outlet. If you want Best Buy to suddenly buy in to Macs, sweeten the profit per machine for Best Buy. They'll move.
That is not the business model for selling PCs. The profit margin for PCs is small. The profit margin for Macs has to be larger, but it is still small. When a Mac customer hands her credit card to the check-out clerk, however, that is the last time they see her. A PC customer, on the other hand, will be back. Why? The PC buyer returns because he needs technical assistance and, quite possibly, additional hardware or software. Stores really make their money during these return visits. In this business model, Macs represent a lost revenue opportunity.
The Apple Store has shown that a different business model can be extremely successful. However, no one else has figured out how to duplicate it.
It's not the whole business model, but it's significant. If it wasn't, "spiffs" wouldn't exist, and it's documented that staff are directed to sell the most profitable machines in many retail stores, even if the difference in profit is only $10 or so.
Also, while stores do make some money on service, they make more money selling service contracts up front. The more reliable the machine is, the more those contracts represent pure profit. So you can expect a hard sell on service plans for Macs.
The Apple Store has shown that a different business model can be extremely successful. However, no one else has figured out how to duplicate it.
What, you mean a clean, inviting atmosphere, meticulously maintained demo machines and a knowledgable sales staff? What's so hard to figure out about that?
CompUSA and Fry's couldn't find their ass with both hands and a map. Don't even get me started on Best Buy.
"IBM is planning on introducing low-end SMP servers and deskside machines based on the PPC970. The machines would be able to run Linux and AIX. A 4-way machine is expected to cost less than $3500! IBM expects a 20x increase in the number of PPC Linux servers by 2006."
Comments
But who's to say Apple didn't want to impart some of the wizardry behind the Power4 über-servers from IBM into its own lineup, namely the multi-chip-module. But this couldn't go in an Xserve could it?
Meh, I don't see this happening seriously. Apple could save a lot of R/D and make some nice royalties by just licensing OS X out to IBM for them to package with their own servers.
Originally posted by hjordis71
Isn't it the Coach & Horses Pub?
Your also forgetting about the Cock 'n Bull off of Cattleman. Even better selection.
See what I mean about drinking with Brits...?!?
Pitcher after pitcher...
Sad thing is, I should remember the name of the place, been there at least a half dozen times in the last ten or so years... There was a pizza place there before...
I haven't been out to the new Cock 'n Bull, but I remember the old place downtown on Main... And the place before that, on Central... Central Perk, heh... Real original Howie...!
Originally posted by Jonathan
eeheeeheeheeeheeheeheeheheeeeheehee.
that is all.
Got any beans to spill?
Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.
Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
Originally posted by moki
Yep. Time to start hittin' the weight room.
Originally posted by moki
mmmmm
I want you
so bad
it's driving me mad
She's so heavy
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...406#post386406
Edit: Oh, wait. Nevermind. It was only about WWDC, I suppose.
Originally posted by moki
Right. Nothing I even hint at is covered by any NDA I have with Apple; I take such things very seriously.
But really, WWDC is 10 days away -- why spoil it? Let the speculation continue unabated.
There will be some heavy things about at WWDC just don't expect to be able to carry 'em home.
Did he think that the G5 would be heavy? It's lighter than a G4. What was heavy?
Originally posted by Rolo
APPLE and IBM would manufacture together machines with N processors where N will go up to 64 G5s! The project is named Dark Star in-house.
I remember reading news reports (not rumors) of IBM working on server machines with up to 64 PowerPC processors, although Power4/Power5 rather than 970 were mentioned.
Can an IBM-made Power4 or Power5 multiprocessor machine running OSX be called a Macintosh?
- Apple has a larger version of the case. Something wide with multiple blade-like motherboards, perhaps? Seems impractical, however.
- A cluster of G5s (or new Xserves), possibly connected by something faster than Ethernet. As Amorph noted above, I came across a note in the specs that says HyperTransport might be useable for that. Alternatively FibreChannel or FireWire3200. Given its emphasis on cooling, using the G5 in a "farm" arrangement seems reasonable. In this case the real technology here would be at the system software level to allow these machines to behave as one many-way SMP machine. Rumours about that have been floating around here for a year now.
I have no idea if there is any truth it this rumour, but given Apple's interest in 3D and the Pro market it seems to me like this is an area where Apple might try to muscle in. Potentially far more lucrative than low-margin consumer machines too. They bought all that 3D software for something, and as impressive as the new G5s are I don't see that they would be enough to wow the movie industry people like they have purportedly been wowed.
Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.
Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
Originally posted by Programmer
...I came across a note in the specs that says HyperTransport might be useable for that.
I thought I remembered a 'Serialized HT' version for board-to-board level connections, but I'm missing it now. Was this what you're talking about? Is it finalized? Or a design for a "HT socket" like a PCI socket?
Originally posted by Programmer
Alternatively FibreChannel or FireWire3200.
Likewise with the FireWire stuff. My reading is that some of the FW3200 stuff is finalized - but I don't see references to FW3200 chipsets... (and Apple probably won't ship a fiberoptic connector for things external to the box). Does anyone know of any proposed FW3200 product?
But this whole line of reasoning rocks
And remember all the rumors about 'XGrid' etc., and now Shake has cluster support that seems suspiciously similar....
Even if this only ends up being a 4-CPU box. Or an IBM-branded box that has Mac OS X Server as an option. I think this would be a net plus for Apple. Sure it sucks some R&D, but there's a LOT of people who think "All macs are REALLY slow". This would be the proverbial sledgehammer to break that mindset.
Originally posted by Nevyn
Sure it sucks some R&D, but there's a LOT of people who think "All macs are REALLY slow". This would be the proverbial sledgehammer to break that mindset.
... some things are worth paying for ...
Originally posted by AirSluf
Does it really matter since there hasn't been a Macintosh for years? We already have an Xserve, essentially a PowerMac in a different case and it doesn't have the name Mac or Macintosh anywhere yet it is immediately recognized as part of the Mac family.
I will rephrase the question then. Would an IBM-made Power4 or Power5 multiprocessor machine running OSX be sold through the Apple store or would it only be available directly from IBM?
http://www.dolphinics.com/
Thoughts? Is this what this company already offers?
--
Ed
Originally posted by Programmer
A cluster of G5s (or new Xserves), possibly connected by something faster than Ethernet.[...] In this case the real technology here would be at the system software level to allow these machines to behave as one many-way SMP machine. Rumours about that have been floating around here for a year now.
I have no idea if there is any truth it this rumour, but given Apple's interest in 3D and the Pro market it seems to me like this is an area where Apple might try to muscle in. Potentially far more lucrative than low-margin consumer machines too.
It's also worth considering that since this kind of high-end stuff carries nice, fat margins, Apple would have a little extra room to sacrifice profit margins on consumer machines, or at least shift them more toward the retail outlet. If you want Best Buy to suddenly buy in to Macs, sweeten the profit per machine for Best Buy. They'll move.
Originally posted by Amorph
It's also worth considering that since this kind of high-end stuff carries nice, fat margins, Apple would have a little extra room to sacrifice profit margins on consumer machines, or at least shift them more toward the retail outlet. If you want Best Buy to suddenly buy in to Macs, sweeten the profit per machine for Best Buy. They'll move.
That is not the business model for selling PCs. The profit margin for PCs is small. The profit margin for Macs has to be larger, but it is still small. When a Mac customer hands her credit card to the check-out clerk, however, that is the last time they see her. A PC customer, on the other hand, will be back. Why? The PC buyer returns because he needs technical assistance and, quite possibly, additional hardware or software. Stores really make their money during these return visits. In this business model, Macs represent a lost revenue opportunity.
The Apple Store has shown that a different business model can be extremely successful. However, no one else has figured out how to duplicate it.
Originally posted by Mr. Me
That is not the business model for selling PCs.
It's not the whole business model, but it's significant. If it wasn't, "spiffs" wouldn't exist, and it's documented that staff are directed to sell the most profitable machines in many retail stores, even if the difference in profit is only $10 or so.
Also, while stores do make some money on service, they make more money selling service contracts up front. The more reliable the machine is, the more those contracts represent pure profit. So you can expect a hard sell on service plans for Macs.
Originally posted by Mr. Me
The Apple Store has shown that a different business model can be extremely successful. However, no one else has figured out how to duplicate it.
What, you mean a clean, inviting atmosphere, meticulously maintained demo machines and a knowledgable sales staff? What's so hard to figure out about that?
CompUSA and Fry's couldn't find their ass with both hands and a map. Don't even get me started on Best Buy.
"IBM is planning on introducing low-end SMP servers and deskside machines based on the PPC970. The machines would be able to run Linux and AIX. A 4-way machine is expected to cost less than $3500! IBM expects a 20x increase in the number of PPC Linux servers by 2006."
Thats some serious competition here...!
--
Ed