FWIW, I'm quite confident that there will be an OSX native version of FM. FM8 is known to be in development, and a few Adobe reps have dropped heavy hints that a carbonized FM7 is at the very least being investigated.
My optimistic prediction is that we will indeed see an OSX native FM7, somewhere around Q42003 or Q12004.
Frame Maker was available for NeXT. Worked well, BTW. A port to OSX from NeXT would not be difficult. Updating it to the current version would be a project, however.
<strong>Frame Maker was available for NeXT. Worked well, BTW. A port to OSX from NeXT would not be difficult. Updating it to the current version would be a project, however.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't want to hijack this thread, so this will be my last contribution on this topic for now.
It's pretty clear from those hints that I spoke of that it will be carbonized using the classic version as the base. It was said that the carbonization itself (not counting QA, I presume) would only take about a month. The main work is associated with implementing CUPS and the GUI.
If you really care about this topic, go over to frameusers and search for obvious things like "carbon", "cocoa" and "OSX". Watch out for posts by Lee Richardson and Dov Isaacs. There's no single post that lays it all out, just a series of hints. Oh, except that the bit about FM8 being developed was reported in an Indian newspaper.
i have it on *good* info that FrameMaker 7.5 will be out soon, and it will be basically FM7 carbonised. Nothing much (if anything) in the way of new features, just carbonised...
its the only thing we use classic for where i work
Look at CeBIT, March 12-19, for the 970 to debut in, according to <a href="http://www-5.ibm.com/de/cebit/en/innovations/index.html"; target="_blank">IBM</a>, PowerPC Blade is the prototype of a server blade designed by IBM Development, based on the new high-performance IBM PowerPC 970.
<strong>Look at CeBIT, March 12-19, for the 970 to debut in, according to <a href="http://www-5.ibm.com/de/cebit/en/innovations/index.html"; target="_blank">IBM</a>, PowerPC Blade is the prototype of a server blade designed by IBM Development, based on the new high-performance IBM PowerPC 970.
Wanna see it -click here.
Yum, yum!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is that a companion chip on your board or are you just glad to see me?
Does anyone know what the XiLinx chip is below the heatsink there?
Is that a companion chip on your board or are you just glad to see me?
Does anyone know what the XiLinx chip is below the heatsink there?</strong><hr></blockquote>
My rather nearsighted eyes seem to think it reads "XC2V1000" under the "XiLink" label. If so, here's a link to it:<a href="http://www.xilinx.com/products/tables/fpga.htm#v2"; target="_blank">Virtex II FPGA data</a>
The XC2V1000 is in the middle of the middle block of specs, under the Virtex-II FPGA heading. From what I can gather, this would be an extremely impressive system I/O controller. However, a) I may have misread the lettering and b) I'm far from an expert on any of this (closer to barely literate).
Is that a companion chip on your board or are you just glad to see me?
Does anyone know what the XiLinx chip is below the heatsink there?</strong><hr></blockquote>
XILINX makes PGAs (programmable gate arrays), which means that it can be programmed to do whatever IBM needs. Makes sense in a prototype, since you don't have to fab a whole new ASIC just for the prototype. Production, however, most probably wouldn't be using a PGA. I know Apple won't be .
Judging only from possition, yes, if could be the companion chip in this picture.
Other things I see:
a Lucent chip, two Broadcom chips, Flash on the main board. And why the heck are they using a laptop HD
PS: told you these weren't a far from production as everyone seems to think! :cool:
Doesn't the MEM-SO512-133 seem a bit odd too? I guess that is why they are stating that this is a prototype. Lord know you'd use a bit better hardware than this!
That's also a rather large heat sink -- more than big enough to cover the CPU and the companion chip, leaving the visible chip to just play the role of southbridge. Won't really know more without more details from the source...
<strong>Doesn't the MEM-SO512-133 seem a bit odd too? I guess that is why they are stating that this is a prototype. Lord know you'd use a bit better hardware than this!</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's like they just grabbed whatever was nearby. Aparently a Thinkpad was all they could reach!
[quote]Originally posted by Transcendental Octothorpe:
<strong>Other things I see:
a Lucent chip, two Broadcom chips, Flash on the main board. And why the heck are they using a laptop HD </strong><hr></blockquote>
I can answer this one. Blades are designed to be stacked tightly side by side into a single rack mounted case, usually about 3U tall or less. You can usually fit about 10-20 blades per case. The blades themselves become cheap servers with very small (due to space constraints) harddrives that merely boot the OS and get you to the point where you can hook into external storage through fiber. This way the only reason you need the laptop drive is for a local boot point. All the heavy lifting is done over fiber on the external storage array.
It looks like dual processor setup to me, but I'm interested in fsb, and the vs. x86 problem. Check out this <a href="http://systemlogic.neoseeker.com/news/articles/headlines/Hardware/2115/"; target="_blank">ARTICLE</a> about Intel, and AMD processors coming this year. 800Mhz FSB, Hypertransport on the AMD processor, and intel has hyperthreaded the upcomming line so two 3.06GHz Xeon's come up as four 3.06GHz Xeons. Same with P4, but 1 will read as 2. DDR 400 memory? That's like PC3500, or 3700.
Intel is also laying the groundwork for 10.20 GHz
Processor.
Does anyone know if IBM is going to be using hypertransport technology? I know they have partnered up[ with AMD for some kind of processor research stuff, or something, but the spread of speed between the PPC, and the x86 world is increasing by a lot now.
Yes, this is looking nice -- and since it seems Apple has wringed out IDG enough to keep stopping by their expo, well, we could have an exciting fall this year. I'll gladly go in for a 970-powered mac despite having this P'book now -- power to go and LOTS of power at home.
I don't see any 970 going towards the PowerBook though (pertaining to that slogan Steveo coined) -- if Apple has had problems getting a G4 to perform without melting inside the 17" PB. How much more low-powered is the 970 really supposed to be?
<strong>It looks like dual processor setup to me, but I'm interested in fsb, and the vs. x86 problem. Check out this <a href="http://systemlogic.neoseeker.com/news/articles/headlines/Hardware/2115/"; target="_blank">ARTICLE</a> about Intel, and AMD processors coming this year. 800Mhz FSB, Hypertransport on the AMD processor, and intel has hyperthreaded the upcomming line so two 3.06GHz Xeon's come up as four 3.06GHz Xeons. Same with P4, but 1 will read as 2. DDR 400 memory? That's like PC3500, or 3700. </strong><hr></blockquote>
HyperThreading might make two Xeons look like four to the software, but that doesn't mean they'll run like four, nor does it in any way help the fact that most Windows software is single-threaded, nor that Windows threading performs poorly.
[quote]<strong>Intel is also laying the groundwork for 10.20 GHz Processor.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And IBM is laying the groundwork for computers built out of individual atoms. Without any further details, this is just FUD. 10GHz when? on what platform? Using how much power? At what level of efficiency per cycle? The interesting questions here are not what Intel promises, but what they actually deliver, and when, and how well it actually performs. I remember their promises about a killer 64 bit platform, and I remember when they said they'd deliver it. Then, years after they said they'd roll this beast out, Itanium limped into the market at 800MHz and flopped, and Intel asked for another couple of years to release the real IA-64 chip. Also, keep in mind that performance does not scale linearly with clockspeed. The law of diminishing returns applies.
IBM is committed at this point to multithreaded, multicore, multiprocessor platforms. So their answer to Intel's single, big, hot, pricey CPU can be a multitude of smaller, cooler, cheaper, SMP-friendly CPUs. Apple's platform is already far more pervasively threaded than Microsoft's, so this should work well.
[quote]<strong>Does anyone know if IBM is going to be using hypertransport technology? I know they have partnered up[ with AMD for some kind of processor research stuff, or something, but the spread of speed between the PPC, and the x86 world is increasing by a lot now.</strong><hr></blockquote>
IBM has been doing high bandwidth architectures since before HyperTransport was a gleam in AMD's eye. If they don't go with that exact technology - and they might well - they'll go with the similar RapidIO, or another solution.
The PPC landscape is about to change dramatically, so induction over the last few years is bound to fail.
[quote] nor that Windows threading performs poorly.
<hr></blockquote>
Tell me about it.
I'm on XP on this Athlon thing. Whenever you try to do more than one thing...XP seizes...petty mal for this...grand mal with you get impatient with the CD icon... This is the fabled 'multi-threading/tasking' Windows had over the old Mac Os 9? Pffff....
PPC is about to be reborn in aqua fire come the fall. 'X' should scream. Then what will Lemon Bon Bon moan about? (Thinks...pauses for thought...I'll get back to you guys on that one...)
Comments
My optimistic prediction is that we will indeed see an OSX native FM7, somewhere around Q42003 or Q12004.
<strong>Frame Maker was available for NeXT. Worked well, BTW. A port to OSX from NeXT would not be difficult. Updating it to the current version would be a project, however.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't want to hijack this thread, so this will be my last contribution on this topic for now.
It's pretty clear from those hints that I spoke of that it will be carbonized using the classic version as the base. It was said that the carbonization itself (not counting QA, I presume) would only take about a month. The main work is associated with implementing CUPS and the GUI.
If you really care about this topic, go over to frameusers and search for obvious things like "carbon", "cocoa" and "OSX". Watch out for posts by Lee Richardson and Dov Isaacs. There's no single post that lays it all out, just a series of hints. Oh, except that the bit about FM8 being developed was reported in an Indian newspaper.
its the only thing we use classic for where i work
Wanna see it - <a href="http://www-5.ibm.com/de/pressroom/cebit2003/i/highres/bladeprototype_300_Dpi.jpg"; target="_blank">click here</a>.
Yum, yum!
[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: Rhumgod ]
[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: Rhumgod ]</p>
<strong>Look at CeBIT, March 12-19, for the 970 to debut in, according to <a href="http://www-5.ibm.com/de/cebit/en/innovations/index.html"; target="_blank">IBM</a>, PowerPC Blade is the prototype of a server blade designed by IBM Development, based on the new high-performance IBM PowerPC 970.
Wanna see it -click here.
Yum, yum!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is that a companion chip on your board or are you just glad to see me?
Does anyone know what the XiLinx chip is below the heatsink there?
<strong>
Is that a companion chip on your board or are you just glad to see me?
Does anyone know what the XiLinx chip is below the heatsink there?</strong><hr></blockquote>
My rather nearsighted eyes seem to think it reads "XC2V1000" under the "XiLink" label. If so, here's a link to it:<a href="http://www.xilinx.com/products/tables/fpga.htm#v2"; target="_blank">Virtex II FPGA data</a>
The XC2V1000 is in the middle of the middle block of specs, under the Virtex-II FPGA heading. From what I can gather, this would be an extremely impressive system I/O controller. However, a) I may have misread the lettering and b) I'm far from an expert on any of this (closer to barely literate).
Any other ideas?
<strong>
Is that a companion chip on your board or are you just glad to see me?
Does anyone know what the XiLinx chip is below the heatsink there?</strong><hr></blockquote>
XILINX makes PGAs (programmable gate arrays), which means that it can be programmed to do whatever IBM needs. Makes sense in a prototype, since you don't have to fab a whole new ASIC just for the prototype. Production, however, most probably wouldn't be using a PGA. I know Apple won't be
Judging only from possition, yes, if could be the companion chip in this picture.
Other things I see:
a Lucent chip, two Broadcom chips, Flash on the main board. And why the heck are they using a laptop HD
PS: told you these weren't a far from production as everyone seems to think! :cool:
[EDIT: looks like TJM beat me by a bit]
[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: Transcendental Octothorpe ]</p>
<strong>Doesn't the MEM-SO512-133 seem a bit odd too? I guess that is why they are stating that this is a prototype. Lord know you'd use a bit better hardware than this!</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's like they just grabbed whatever was nearby. Aparently a Thinkpad was all they could reach!
<strong>Other things I see:
a Lucent chip, two Broadcom chips, Flash on the main board. And why the heck are they using a laptop HD
I can answer this one. Blades are designed to be stacked tightly side by side into a single rack mounted case, usually about 3U tall or less. You can usually fit about 10-20 blades per case. The blades themselves become cheap servers with very small (due to space constraints) harddrives that merely boot the OS and get you to the point where you can hook into external storage through fiber. This way the only reason you need the laptop drive is for a local boot point. All the heavy lifting is done over fiber on the external storage array.
<img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
<strong>i agree, thats a chunky heatsink...
<img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmm... seems remarkably similar in size to the heatsinks in the current PowerMacs. Coincidence? or not?
<img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
<strong>
It's like they just grabbed whatever was nearby. Aparently a Thinkpad was all they could reach!</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> Probably!
As for the hard drive, I think a blade server could be setup to use a standard IDE, SCSI drive etc. Take a look at what IBM is <a href="http://www.pc.ibm.com/us/products/eserver/xseries/bladecentertour/index.html"; target="_blank">currently offering</a>.
[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: Rhumgod ]</p>
Intel is also laying the groundwork for 10.20 GHz
Processor.
Does anyone know if IBM is going to be using hypertransport technology? I know they have partnered up[ with AMD for some kind of processor research stuff, or something, but the spread of speed between the PPC, and the x86 world is increasing by a lot now.
This has now become a major concern of mine.
<hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
...yeah...and that heatsink looks remarkably familiar...
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
So...is this REALLY a 970 prototype?! Er...(nervously...) I...I wonder what Apple have if this baby is on show at CeBit?
Macworld Newyork, here we come?
Lemon Bon Bon
I don't see any 970 going towards the PowerBook though (pertaining to that slogan Steveo coined) -- if Apple has had problems getting a G4 to perform without melting inside the 17" PB. How much more low-powered is the 970 really supposed to be?
<strong>It looks like dual processor setup to me, but I'm interested in fsb, and the vs. x86 problem. Check out this <a href="http://systemlogic.neoseeker.com/news/articles/headlines/Hardware/2115/"; target="_blank">ARTICLE</a> about Intel, and AMD processors coming this year. 800Mhz FSB, Hypertransport on the AMD processor, and intel has hyperthreaded the upcomming line so two 3.06GHz Xeon's come up as four 3.06GHz Xeons. Same with P4, but 1 will read as 2. DDR 400 memory? That's like PC3500, or 3700. </strong><hr></blockquote>
HyperThreading might make two Xeons look like four to the software, but that doesn't mean they'll run like four, nor does it in any way help the fact that most Windows software is single-threaded, nor that Windows threading performs poorly.
[quote]<strong>Intel is also laying the groundwork for 10.20 GHz Processor.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And IBM is laying the groundwork for computers built out of individual atoms. Without any further details, this is just FUD. 10GHz when? on what platform? Using how much power? At what level of efficiency per cycle? The interesting questions here are not what Intel promises, but what they actually deliver, and when, and how well it actually performs. I remember their promises about a killer 64 bit platform, and I remember when they said they'd deliver it. Then, years after they said they'd roll this beast out, Itanium limped into the market at 800MHz and flopped, and Intel asked for another couple of years to release the real IA-64 chip. Also, keep in mind that performance does not scale linearly with clockspeed. The law of diminishing returns applies.
IBM is committed at this point to multithreaded, multicore, multiprocessor platforms. So their answer to Intel's single, big, hot, pricey CPU can be a multitude of smaller, cooler, cheaper, SMP-friendly CPUs. Apple's platform is already far more pervasively threaded than Microsoft's, so this should work well.
[quote]<strong>Does anyone know if IBM is going to be using hypertransport technology? I know they have partnered up[ with AMD for some kind of processor research stuff, or something, but the spread of speed between the PPC, and the x86 world is increasing by a lot now.</strong><hr></blockquote>
IBM has been doing high bandwidth architectures since before HyperTransport was a gleam in AMD's eye. If they don't go with that exact technology - and they might well - they'll go with the similar RapidIO, or another solution.
The PPC landscape is about to change dramatically, so induction over the last few years is bound to fail.
[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
<hr></blockquote>
Tell me about it.
I'm on XP on this Athlon thing. Whenever you try to do more than one thing...XP seizes...petty mal for this...grand mal with you get impatient with the CD icon... This is the fabled 'multi-threading/tasking' Windows had over the old Mac Os 9? Pffff....
PPC is about to be reborn in aqua fire come the fall. 'X' should scream. Then what will Lemon Bon Bon moan about? (Thinks...pauses for thought...I'll get back to you guys on that one...)
Lemon Bon Bon <img src="confused.gif" border="0">