<strong>Come now people. Has nobody ever seen a IIsi or Quadra 610, PowerMac 6100 on the inside? It would not be hard to imagine an "L" shaped adapter so you can mount a PCI card parallel to the board.</strong><hr></blockquote>
but then one would expect a PCI riser card, or a slot for one and now 2 clearly labeled PCI card slots.
but then one would expect a PCI riser card, or a slot for one and now 2 clearly labeled PCI card slots.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thats what I'm talking about. PCI riser card; basically a small PCB card about one inch high with an edge connector on one end and a PCI slot 90 degrees.
It is not an assembly line, where raw materials goes in, and 60 days later a finished processor pops out. I have no idea whether 60 days is correct, but it could be.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The 60 day figure is correct for a rough figure.
However, they say they can push a wafer through start-to-finish in only 30 days if they have enough incentive.
I've heard that this project does, indeed, have certain powerful incectives to get parts out by a particular date.
holy shit- I just re-read one of Moki's quotes concerning marklar and apple and all the recent news, dual boot, market share etc.
What if-
We were wrong in assuming that OS X was going to be ported over to x86, whereas instead, the 970s will have an emulation built it to run X and windows seemlessly? Who would buy a PC when you could have just as fast windows programs and OSX flying along on a 64bit screaming 970?
The 970 would be the hottest 64 bit chip on either platform.
[oops, seems 2 posters here already posted the same theory. Well, maybe we are on to something then?]
<strong>holy shit- I just re-read one of Moki's quotes concerning marklar and apple and all the recent news, dual boot, market share etc.
What if-
We were wrong in assuming that OS X was going to be ported over to x86, whereas instead, the 970s will have an emulation built it to run X and windows seemlessly? Who would buy a PC when you could have just as fast windows programs and OSX flying along on a 64bit screaming 970?
The 970 would be the hottest 64 bit chip on either platform.
[oops, seems 2 posters here already posted the same theory. Well, maybe we are on to something then?]
Guh. No. Seamless Windows support could kill the Mac as a development platform. X11 isn't so much of a threat because there isn't much of an intersection between UNIX apps and consumer apps.
Now, on the other hand, the possibility of Microsoft porting NT (whatever they've decided to call it this year) to the 970 is more interesting. It's not an automatic loss for Apple because the bulk of Windows software will have to be ported (as with NT/Alpha), and it will further muddy the future of Windows as a 64-bit platform, because MS will now have three horses to bet on, and Intel will have that much more pressure on them. To the extent that the 970 succeeds as an NT platform (which is debatable, given NT/Alpha) IBM sells more 970s, and both IBM and Apple benefit.
The downside is that Microsoft plays hardball, and if IBM is in any way dependent on MS elsewhere, MS will use that as leverage to try to seize the upper hand in the relationshp. Unless the new CEO has more of a spine than Gerstner did, this will be a problem.
Welcome to the thread! Great minds do think alike, they say. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, by the time I wrote down what I was thinking I forgot my orginal angle.
What is Apple used the emulation in a box by itself? They would essentially be selling PC hardware. What better way to make money then to sell PC hardware? Of course, the dual boot OS X emulation also works
I did notice the Broadcom chips seem to be the BCM5703S. Are these currently being used?
BCM5703S 10/100/1000BASE-T Controller With Integrated Transceiver
The BCM5703S 10/100/1000BASE-T Gigabit Ethernet Media Access Control and Serializer/Deserializer (SERDES) is a fully integrated interface solution for high-performance network applications. The BCM5703S is a highly integrated solution combining a triple-speed, IEEE 802.3 compliant Media Access Controller (MAC), PCI and PCI-X bus interfaces, on-chip buffer memory, and an integrated SERDES transceiver in a single device. The BCM5703S is fabricated in a low-voltage .13µ CMOS process, providing a low-power system solution. By itself, the BCM5703S provides a complete single-chip Gigabit Ethernet NIC or LOM solution.
Support for the following 802.3 functions is featured in the MAC: VLAN tagging, layer 2 priority encoding, link aggregation, and full-duplex flow control.
The device provides both PCI v2.2 and PCI-X v1.0 bus interfaces. The BCM5703S provides large on-chip buffer memory for stand-alone operation. Dual on-chip highperformance processors enable custom frame processing features, including TCP segmentation. <a href="http://www.broadcom.com/"; target="_blank">Broadcom's web page</a>
[quote]However, they say they can push a wafer through start-to-finish in only 30 days if they have enough incentive.
I've heard that this project does, indeed, have certain powerful incectives to get parts out by a particular date.
<hr></blockquote>
Apple's R&D budget is wayyy up. I wonder if IBM is getting those incentives. When you put it LIKE THAT then...hmmm.
Kid Red.
Would Apple be so audacious? They might be. A dual boot that could make Windows fly and offer even better 970 'X' performance..?
I think this could be a killer strategy.
Every x86 dual boot Apple sold would earn them money. It won't undermine the Mac platform because they sell a Mac.
People get to try 'X' and like it. They get to use x86 and have a cool looking machine.
Hell, if you're paying £2K for a Dell, why not get a Mac and run x86 as well.
Kinda like two for the price of one?
Classic supermarket buy one, get one free...
When you are losing sales in the education sector. This could be a solution. Let's face it. An x86 m/b and cpu functionality are quite dirty cheap. Apple could sell PC functionality in their machines quite cheaply for the premium they charge.
i like the idea of windoze and mac osx. say on a a new mac you get osx and xp with osx as the default boot system just like classic ans x. however make it a bit harder to "install" xp. kind of like how they do with jagaur and classic. either way make it an an option. and dont ship windows with it. eww. but it couldbe a selling point. we have all the software you oculd need in osx. safari, ie, ilife, etc. but if there is something you just have to have thats only on windows for now, then you can always install your copy of windows and it will work.
[quote]Originally posted by Transcendental Octothorpe:
<strong>
The 60 day figure is correct for a rough figure.
However, they say they can push a wafer through start-to-finish in only 30 days if they have enough incentive.
I've heard that this project does, indeed, have certain powerful incectives to get parts out by a particular date.</strong><hr></blockquote>
30 days would put them within striking distance of WWDC. Announce and ship a month later, perhaps. That is, assuming Apple could ramp up production that fast.
Apple certainly has incentive to start shipping something to boost sales, it won't happen this quarter, but I'm sure they'd love some progress next quarter.
I don't think Apple would have to limit anything about XP or an windows OS or anything to undermine any aspect of the hardware running windows apps. I jsut think that some of the rumors may be the opposite of what we originally thought, and that Apple who makes most of it's cash selling hardware, can make more cash selling PC hardware thru emulation. If windows could run in the X1 (?) environment seamlessly with OS X, and the 970 was as fast if not faster then any pllll out there, who wouldn't buy it. So either thru dual boot OR seamlessly 'classic-evirnoment' like emulation, Apple could become a hardware giant.
Top that with comments recently that Apple plans to sell and earn more cash with new and wider range of software I think Apple can make a big move.
Could it be that Connectix agreed to be bought by MicroSoft precisely because of this? They saw the handwriting on the wall and got out while the gettin' was good. MS said they bought Connectix for their server emulation software, not VPC - it apparently had little or no value to them. Perhaps because VPC is about to become irrelevant?
<strong>It would be a great selling point to switchers "no need to buy all new mac software just yet as your existing pc software will run flawlessly".</strong><hr></blockquote>
Or to the developers: "no need to develop Mac versions of your apps - the Windows versions run flawlessly on Macs"
The incentive would be from competators who develop for the Mac platform. Say for example, Adobe droped the development of Illustrator for the Mac OS, but Macromedia did not. There is an aproximate 10-20% loss in peak performance when using an emulator (just random numbers here, I dont know what it would be). Then Illustrator now runs at best 10% slower than it would if it were written for the Mac OS, yet FreeHand takes full advantage of the 970, so FreeHand runs faster and might get more converts. Also, since AltiVec is PowerPC specific none of the Windows programs could take advantage of it. This would be a great chance for the smaller software companies to make sales, which would pressure the larger companies to develop for both platforms.
[quote] Or to the developers: "no need to develop Mac versions of your apps - the Windows versions run flawlessly on Macs"
<hr></blockquote>
What? And turn down an extra 25 million users worth of revenue? Why don't they just say, 'You're only 1.9% world wide, buy a Windows Box and the Windows versions will run flawlessly.'
I don't think so.
Said 'x86' environment won't have the compelling iLife suite. Final Cut Pro. Shake. etc. iSync.
Or the Jewel. 'X'.
Apple's developing alot more software. I wonder why. Perhaps because they are rather good at it..?
'x86 Emulation' or 'Dual-Boot'. It boils down to one thing.
Can Apple compete..?
I think they can.
The Proverb of Safari.
M$'s 40 billion aint buying Gatesy boy control of the internet or Linux. Gee, I wonder why not..?
Open Source is forcing M$ to compete. All that .Net pish to lock in users...will get them nowhere.
Apple can take a bit of Open Source. Do a bit of Aqua and Apple on top and la cookin' sauce. Their $4 billion beats the snot out of M$'s $40 billion. Apple can do alot more with alot more.
M$ have to start from the ground up...or buy somebody. M$ do this to 'take people out'.
Apple bought Shake and Co. because they had a clear plan of how to progress.
Apple did Safari because IE was crap. Apple have proven they are great at software and don't have to even break a sweat to make M$'s software attempts breath hard.
What does this have to do with emulation and dual boot systems.
Maybe nothing. Maybe alot.
Apple don't need bleeding edge x86 performance. If Apple can stick an 'x86 Classic' environment ala x11 on their 'X'...you can bet alot of Windows users will find Pentium III 1 gig to Pentium 4 1.4 gig performance quite acceptable to run all their old apps. And when they try Apple's Digital Software from Photoshop to iLife on the 970...they'll be blown away by the performance on a 'low-end' 1.8 gig 970. Quality and Power.
To grow. Apple need to get straight A's.
There are alot of hints that the 970 is going to be a revolution in Mac cpu power. That's going to be a compelling 'Switch' argument.
Note. x11 runs in an Aqua interface? no?
Wonder if...Apple's x86 'classic' would run Windows apps in Aqua style Windows!
'X' looks like the ultimate Chamelion OS.
Alot of the Sacred cows aint going to matter if Apple keeps selling boxes, dual boot, emulation or otherwise. It's still got it's software on each Box that goes out there. It's got most of the developers that matter.
x86 emulation. I think the idea that Mac developers would suddenly drop their Mac codebase is ludicrous. It's either worth doing or its not. If they other Pentium 3 1 gig emulation...25 million Mac users aren't going to be happy at Adobe offering inferior performance on a dual 970 box that makes Photoshop fly in native Mac performance. It's a compelling performance argument that people can buy into. Different kettle of fish to trying the same strategy with crappy G4 cpus.
The 970s better be good and arrive in a timely manner to arrest an alarming sales slide since 1999. Or Apple's Tower base will erode further to nothing in several years at the current rate of going. I'm not sure I have a major problem of Apple becoming a software only company.
However, we'd miss out on some insanely great designs and innovation x86 simply isn't providing. I don't think Apple's hardware business can afford to get any smaller than it is. That's just a gut feeling. They need to grow and sell more kit.
Looking at the LCDs, recent tower cuts, X-serve et al. Seems like Apple is waking up. I await the pricing of Apple's fall line with great interest.
Comments
<strong>Come now people. Has nobody ever seen a IIsi or Quadra 610, PowerMac 6100 on the inside? It would not be hard to imagine an "L" shaped adapter so you can mount a PCI card parallel to the board.</strong><hr></blockquote>
but then one would expect a PCI riser card, or a slot for one and now 2 clearly labeled PCI card slots.
<strong>
but then one would expect a PCI riser card, or a slot for one and now 2 clearly labeled PCI card slots.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thats what I'm talking about. PCI riser card; basically a small PCB card about one inch high with an edge connector on one end and a PCI slot 90 degrees.
<strong>
I'VE GOT IT!!!!
It's not a blade server at all!!!
It's actually a controller for a Fusion Pulse Cannon off of an Auroran Cruiser! Those fiends at IBM are in league with the Aurorans!
[ 03-03-2003: Message edited by: TJM ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, actually, their Intel blade servers are Fusion Pulse Cannons. The heat from the Pentium directly powers the weapon.
This one is stolen Polaris technology.
(That whoosh sound was the sound of this going over everyone's heads...)
<strong>
It is not an assembly line, where raw materials goes in, and 60 days later a finished processor pops out. I have no idea whether 60 days is correct, but it could be.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The 60 day figure is correct for a rough figure.
However, they say they can push a wafer through start-to-finish in only 30 days if they have enough incentive.
I've heard that this project does, indeed, have certain powerful incectives to get parts out by a particular date.
What if-
We were wrong in assuming that OS X was going to be ported over to x86, whereas instead, the 970s will have an emulation built it to run X and windows seemlessly? Who would buy a PC when you could have just as fast windows programs and OSX flying along on a 64bit screaming 970?
The 970 would be the hottest 64 bit chip on either platform.
[oops, seems 2 posters here already posted the same theory. Well, maybe we are on to something then?]
[ 03-03-2003: Message edited by: KidRed ]</p>
<strong>holy shit- I just re-read one of Moki's quotes concerning marklar and apple and all the recent news, dual boot, market share etc.
What if-
We were wrong in assuming that OS X was going to be ported over to x86, whereas instead, the 970s will have an emulation built it to run X and windows seemlessly? Who would buy a PC when you could have just as fast windows programs and OSX flying along on a 64bit screaming 970?
The 970 would be the hottest 64 bit chip on either platform.
[oops, seems 2 posters here already posted the same theory. Well, maybe we are on to something then?]
[ 03-03-2003: Message edited by: KidRed ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Now, on the other hand, the possibility of Microsoft porting NT (whatever they've decided to call it this year) to the 970 is more interesting. It's not an automatic loss for Apple because the bulk of Windows software will have to be ported (as with NT/Alpha), and it will further muddy the future of Windows as a 64-bit platform, because MS will now have three horses to bet on, and Intel will have that much more pressure on them. To the extent that the 970 succeeds as an NT platform (which is debatable, given NT/Alpha) IBM sells more 970s, and both IBM and Apple benefit.
The downside is that Microsoft plays hardball, and if IBM is in any way dependent on MS elsewhere, MS will use that as leverage to try to seize the upper hand in the relationshp. Unless the new CEO has more of a spine than Gerstner did, this will be a problem.
[ 03-03-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
<strong>
The 60 day figure is correct for a rough figure.
However, they say they can push a wafer through start-to-finish in only 30 days if they have enough incentive.
I've heard that this project does, indeed, have certain powerful incectives to get parts out by a particular date.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thank you, my sanity is restored.
<strong>
Actually, by the time I wrote down what I was thinking I forgot my orginal angle.
What is Apple used the emulation in a box by itself? They would essentially be selling PC hardware. What better way to make money then to sell PC hardware? Of course, the dual boot OS X emulation also works
<strong>
No, actually, their Intel blade servers are Fusion Pulse Cannons. The heat from the Pentium directly powers the weapon.
This one is stolen Polaris technology.
(That whoosh sound was the sound of this going over everyone's heads...)</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well duh! Everyone knows how advanced their technology is!
BCM5703S 10/100/1000BASE-T Controller With Integrated Transceiver
The BCM5703S 10/100/1000BASE-T Gigabit Ethernet Media Access Control and Serializer/Deserializer (SERDES) is a fully integrated interface solution for high-performance network applications. The BCM5703S is a highly integrated solution combining a triple-speed, IEEE 802.3 compliant Media Access Controller (MAC), PCI and PCI-X bus interfaces, on-chip buffer memory, and an integrated SERDES transceiver in a single device. The BCM5703S is fabricated in a low-voltage .13µ CMOS process, providing a low-power system solution. By itself, the BCM5703S provides a complete single-chip Gigabit Ethernet NIC or LOM solution.
Support for the following 802.3 functions is featured in the MAC: VLAN tagging, layer 2 priority encoding, link aggregation, and full-duplex flow control.
The device provides both PCI v2.2 and PCI-X v1.0 bus interfaces. The BCM5703S provides large on-chip buffer memory for stand-alone operation. Dual on-chip highperformance processors enable custom frame processing features, including TCP segmentation. <a href="http://www.broadcom.com/"; target="_blank">Broadcom's web page</a>
opps copied the wrong product info
[ 03-03-2003: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>
I've heard that this project does, indeed, have certain powerful incectives to get parts out by a particular date.
<hr></blockquote>
Apple's R&D budget is wayyy up. I wonder if IBM is getting those incentives. When you put it LIKE THAT then...hmmm.
Kid Red.
Would Apple be so audacious? They might be. A dual boot that could make Windows fly and offer even better 970 'X' performance..?
I think this could be a killer strategy.
Every x86 dual boot Apple sold would earn them money. It won't undermine the Mac platform because they sell a Mac.
People get to try 'X' and like it. They get to use x86 and have a cool looking machine.
Hell, if you're paying £2K for a Dell, why not get a Mac and run x86 as well.
Kinda like two for the price of one?
Classic supermarket buy one, get one free...
When you are losing sales in the education sector. This could be a solution. Let's face it. An x86 m/b and cpu functionality are quite dirty cheap. Apple could sell PC functionality in their machines quite cheaply for the premium they charge.
'Dual Boot'. Whither Moki?
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>
The 60 day figure is correct for a rough figure.
However, they say they can push a wafer through start-to-finish in only 30 days if they have enough incentive.
I've heard that this project does, indeed, have certain powerful incectives to get parts out by a particular date.</strong><hr></blockquote>
30 days would put them within striking distance of WWDC. Announce and ship a month later, perhaps. That is, assuming Apple could ramp up production that fast.
Apple certainly has incentive to start shipping something to boost sales, it won't happen this quarter, but I'm sure they'd love some progress next quarter.
Top that with comments recently that Apple plans to sell and earn more cash with new and wider range of software I think Apple can make a big move.
Could it be that Connectix agreed to be bought by MicroSoft precisely because of this? They saw the handwriting on the wall and got out while the gettin' was good. MS said they bought Connectix for their server emulation software, not VPC - it apparently had little or no value to them. Perhaps because VPC is about to become irrelevant?
<strong>It would be a great selling point to switchers "no need to buy all new mac software just yet as your existing pc software will run flawlessly".</strong><hr></blockquote>
Or to the developers: "no need to develop Mac versions of your apps - the Windows versions run flawlessly on Macs"
[ 03-03-2003: Message edited by: JLL ]</p>
<strong>
Or to the developers: "no need to develop Mac versions of your apps - the Windows versions run flawlessly on Macs"
[ 03-03-2003: Message edited by: JLL ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
The incentive would be from competators who develop for the Mac platform. Say for example, Adobe droped the development of Illustrator for the Mac OS, but Macromedia did not. There is an aproximate 10-20% loss in peak performance when using an emulator (just random numbers here, I dont know what it would be). Then Illustrator now runs at best 10% slower than it would if it were written for the Mac OS, yet FreeHand takes full advantage of the 970, so FreeHand runs faster and might get more converts. Also, since AltiVec is PowerPC specific none of the Windows programs could take advantage of it. This would be a great chance for the smaller software companies to make sales, which would pressure the larger companies to develop for both platforms.
<hr></blockquote>
What? And turn down an extra 25 million users worth of revenue? Why don't they just say, 'You're only 1.9% world wide, buy a Windows Box and the Windows versions will run flawlessly.'
I don't think so.
Said 'x86' environment won't have the compelling iLife suite. Final Cut Pro. Shake. etc. iSync.
Or the Jewel. 'X'.
Apple's developing alot more software. I wonder why. Perhaps because they are rather good at it..?
'x86 Emulation' or 'Dual-Boot'. It boils down to one thing.
Can Apple compete..?
I think they can.
The Proverb of Safari.
M$'s 40 billion aint buying Gatesy boy control of the internet or Linux. Gee, I wonder why not..?
Open Source is forcing M$ to compete. All that .Net pish to lock in users...will get them nowhere.
Apple can take a bit of Open Source. Do a bit of Aqua and Apple on top and la cookin' sauce. Their $4 billion beats the snot out of M$'s $40 billion. Apple can do alot more with alot more.
M$ have to start from the ground up...or buy somebody. M$ do this to 'take people out'.
Apple bought Shake and Co. because they had a clear plan of how to progress.
Apple did Safari because IE was crap. Apple have proven they are great at software and don't have to even break a sweat to make M$'s software attempts breath hard.
What does this have to do with emulation and dual boot systems.
Maybe nothing. Maybe alot.
Apple don't need bleeding edge x86 performance. If Apple can stick an 'x86 Classic' environment ala x11 on their 'X'...you can bet alot of Windows users will find Pentium III 1 gig to Pentium 4 1.4 gig performance quite acceptable to run all their old apps. And when they try Apple's Digital Software from Photoshop to iLife on the 970...they'll be blown away by the performance on a 'low-end' 1.8 gig 970. Quality and Power.
To grow. Apple need to get straight A's.
There are alot of hints that the 970 is going to be a revolution in Mac cpu power. That's going to be a compelling 'Switch' argument.
Note. x11 runs in an Aqua interface? no?
Wonder if...Apple's x86 'classic' would run Windows apps in Aqua style Windows!
'X' looks like the ultimate Chamelion OS.
Alot of the Sacred cows aint going to matter if Apple keeps selling boxes, dual boot, emulation or otherwise. It's still got it's software on each Box that goes out there. It's got most of the developers that matter.
x86 emulation. I think the idea that Mac developers would suddenly drop their Mac codebase is ludicrous. It's either worth doing or its not. If they other Pentium 3 1 gig emulation...25 million Mac users aren't going to be happy at Adobe offering inferior performance on a dual 970 box that makes Photoshop fly in native Mac performance. It's a compelling performance argument that people can buy into. Different kettle of fish to trying the same strategy with crappy G4 cpus.
The 970s better be good and arrive in a timely manner to arrest an alarming sales slide since 1999. Or Apple's Tower base will erode further to nothing in several years at the current rate of going. I'm not sure I have a major problem of Apple becoming a software only company.
However, we'd miss out on some insanely great designs and innovation x86 simply isn't providing. I don't think Apple's hardware business can afford to get any smaller than it is. That's just a gut feeling. They need to grow and sell more kit.
Looking at the LCDs, recent tower cuts, X-serve et al. Seems like Apple is waking up. I await the pricing of Apple's fall line with great interest.
Lemon Bon Bon
<img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
[ 03-03-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>