970 will give Apple one springboard for growth...for their tower line. If they're serious...they're going to have to play things differently to the complacent tower strategies of PPC ghosts past.
"If 970 performance dropped into the current PM prices tomorrow it be barely acceptable "- well i for one would accept it gladly, it's going to be more than just a new chip after all isn't it.
How long did it take to put a G4 in the Powerbooks?
How long did it take to put DDR-RAM in Macs?
And they don't even support it yet.
Apple will put Dual G4s in the Power Macs + price cuts and the PPC970 in the workstation.
I hope you are right and i'm wrong. I want a Power Mac Dual PPC970 2GHz and i want it now!
They do support DDR, its Motorola's processor that doesn't. These are functions of the processor, which is outside of Apple's direct control. We're not privvy to what goes on between Motorola and Apple so its a bit unfair to say "they should have pushed Moto harder" since we don't know how hard they pushed. My guess is that Moto dragged Apple down screaming and yelling, leading Apple on with promises they couldn't keep and eventually dropping the G5 project when Moto's business really tanked. Back in '97-98 IBM went off and did its own thing (POWER4) but by 2000, at the latest, Apple was already talking to them about doing a desktop version. People keep saying the current situation is Apple's fault and that they should have done "something". My opinion is that they did do something but the only public proof of that is that the 970 has AltiVec (which many people don't seem to believe we'll see in an Apple machine, for some reason). Processor development takes a lot of time and a bunch of impatient stamping of feet doesn't speed it up.
and it's not like Apple had a lot of choices. IBM was still working on PowerPC chip versions when Moto fell apart and Apple was no doubt talking to them about adding stuff geared to Apple. Here is a discussion on the IBM chips during the time frame in reference.
and it's not like Apple had a lot of choices. IBM was still working on PowerPC chip versions when Moto fell apart and Apple was no doubt talking to them about adding stuff geared to Apple. Here is a discussion on the IBM chips during the time frame in reference.
That's a good article -- in particular it highlights how long processor development takes. IBM started the POWER4 project in 1996, aiming for completion late-2001. And they did it! That's an astounding feat of engineering, if you ask me. And the chip supports 6 different (albeit very similar) architectures. And it hit the market as the fastest chip available.
Ranting, trollin' og facts?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Facts, i know somebody, how is nearly to Apple ... (not USA). These Apple guys told him, that a Apple workstation will arrive in summer 2003.
Previewsly, he found hints (PPC970) on Apples own HP, i don't know where but i think somewhere on the ADC pages?!
I hope i am wrong, i'm waiting for Power Macs G5 since 2002 (Thanx TheReg).
OK, you said your friend mentioned a workstation this year, but did he say 'no 970 desktop this year'? Also, could he be getting the 970 an the 'workstation' confused? How does he know that the 2 aren't to be released this year?
Sorry, just don't see why a workstation would be more important to Apple then desktops would.
"Workstation" doesn't necessarily mean a $10K beast. That's how much a UNIX workstation has traditionally cost, but that's not relevant to Apple. A workstation is basically a professional desktop. Steve called the Cube a "workstation" once, after all.
Apple has been lowering prices, and part of their whole pitch to the UNIX community has been that you can get a UNIX workstation and a PC desktop combined for the price of a PC desktop. Given that the high-end workstation market is dying, there's no reason to enter it, especially if it means a radical shift in tactics.
I'm not saying the 970 will be cheap, but I'm expecting it to slot in right about where the PowerMacs are now, in the sense that if you spend as much money as you do on a complete PM rig, you get something comparable (only with far better performance).
New motherboards are coming and Apple has been able to desing these motherboards with the future in mind. No OS9 booting ...no old crusty MPX bus.
I will reserve judgment until the first sytems ship. I am however optimistic.
It's time to move forward. I expect Apple to infuse the Powermac line fully with 970's and if anything is "Workstation" priced it will be loaded to the gills.
I can't stop thinking about the length of these boards. I agree that it sounds like a Xserve 1U rack size board to me as well. I would certainly use a PowerMac in a 1, or 2U rack space if it had all the features of my standing desktop PowerMac model, but I fear that PCI-(X) space would be limited, and I would end up buying an Apple, or more likely a cheaper 3rd party Raid setup for added drive space. That would be totally unacceptable.
On the other hand if Apple is designing a new PowerMac enclosure for the 970 I hope they do not loose the drop down door. The convenience of the door alone is worth it's weight in gold, and everybody that ever expanded drive space, or memory, or just opened the thing is aware of it.
EDIT: And you know everybody is going to nag if it does not have
DDR 3500 - it's available to buy now, don't skimp on features.
USB 2.0 - I don't know why it's not an option yet?
PCI-X - available inb PC's now
FireWire 800 - not worried about that.
Serial ATA - Available in PC's now
And, dual processors for the high end models, not just low end.
That's a good article -- in particular it highlights how long processor development takes. IBM started the POWER4 project in 1996, aiming for completion late-2001. And they did it! That's an astounding feat of engineering, if you ask me. And the chip supports 6 different (albeit very similar) architectures. And it hit the market as the fastest chip available.
Ageed. it's not like Apple can snap their finger and get a new processor when they want it. So, at least to me, bashing Apple for not getting a faster processor when Moto had problems is a moot point. They were probably aware of what IBM was doing and realized they had options and exercised them. Wonder how they got IBM to add Altivec (cash or contract for purchase. Probably never know?)
Wonder how they got IBM to add Altivec (cash or contract for purchase. Probably never know?)
They probably just asked them. IBM had a some SIMD in the work's for this (rumors said so anyway), it was similar to altivec, but better. I'm hoping that's what it is, and we'll hear about it's improvements in a keynote.
OK, you said your friend mentioned a workstation this year, but did he say 'no 970 desktop this year'? Also, could he be getting the 970 an the 'workstation' confused? How does he know that the 2 aren't to be released this year?
Sorry, just don't see why a workstation would be more important to Apple then desktops would.
No he didn't, these are my thoughts only. But maybe i'm wrong. Isanely Great Mac talks about two different MOBOs (pro/ consumer)
The PPC 970 back side bus is 1/2 of processor speed, right?
If a 2.5GHz PPC970 is available, this means a 1.25GHz back side bus (625MHz FSB):eek:
What kind of memory can support it?
When will it available?? DDR2 625?
You don't need to have synchronously clocked memory to match the processor. This is handled by the memory controller, and you can use any kind of memory, even down to PC133. I don't think you'll get any DDR625 for your 2,5Ghz POWERMac (unless it shows up very late when that kind of memory is feasable economically), but the kind of memory that has the best price/performance ratio, and is the most suitable for use in a desktop. Since we don't know when the 2,5Ghz monster is released, we don't know much about what kind of memory that'll be used.
- As for the prototypes, the processor should be established with 45° on the mother charts of series. One can explain that by the greatest complexity of wiring 64 bits.
- the processor will be directly established on the mother chart of the machines thus more charts girls. It will be on a socket resembling that of Pentium.
- the mother chart will have an integrated port fiber channel and will support the USB 2.0.
Didn't we see a diagonal ship layout before? Is this new? No wait, that was a diagonal layout on a daughtercard. Hm.
Fibre Channel or a fiber optic port? Either way very nice.
USB 2.0? Blah. USB -still- is for mice; Firewire is for men.
Oh and case manufacturers have until April 15th to offer bids for "future professional machines (not of P62 code)."
Comments
Lemon Bon Bon
Quote:
Originally posted by Chucker:
<strong>
That wasn't Apple's fault.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Maybe not 100%, but Apple should have pushed Moto more than they did..!
What exactly is Serial-ATA?
not at all
Come on 900mhz bus speed!
Originally posted by Outsider
Bring on PCI-Express and/or PCI-X!
Considering PCI Express isn't planned to appear until mid 2004 I would be a touch surprised to see it anytime soon.
Originally posted by Telomar
Considering PCI Express isn't planned to appear until mid 2004 I would be a touch surprised to see it anytime soon.
Sorry, I had this confused with PCI-X, which is already in some high end PCs.
Originally posted by Fat Freddy
Don't foget, we talk about Apple!
How long did it take to put a G4 in the Powerbooks?
How long did it take to put DDR-RAM in Macs?
And they don't even support it yet.
Apple will put Dual G4s in the Power Macs + price cuts and the PPC970 in the workstation.
I hope you are right and i'm wrong. I want a Power Mac Dual PPC970 2GHz and i want it now!
They do support DDR, its Motorola's processor that doesn't. These are functions of the processor, which is outside of Apple's direct control. We're not privvy to what goes on between Motorola and Apple so its a bit unfair to say "they should have pushed Moto harder" since we don't know how hard they pushed. My guess is that Moto dragged Apple down screaming and yelling, leading Apple on with promises they couldn't keep and eventually dropping the G5 project when Moto's business really tanked. Back in '97-98 IBM went off and did its own thing (POWER4) but by 2000, at the latest, Apple was already talking to them about doing a desktop version. People keep saying the current situation is Apple's fault and that they should have done "something". My opinion is that they did do something but the only public proof of that is that the 970 has AltiVec (which many people don't seem to believe we'll see in an Apple machine, for some reason). Processor development takes a lot of time and a bunch of impatient stamping of feet doesn't speed it up.
Originally posted by Bigc
and it's not like Apple had a lot of choices. IBM was still working on PowerPC chip versions when Moto fell apart and Apple was no doubt talking to them about adding stuff geared to Apple. Here is a discussion on the IBM chips during the time frame in reference.
That's a good article -- in particular it highlights how long processor development takes. IBM started the POWER4 project in 1996, aiming for completion late-2001. And they did it! That's an astounding feat of engineering, if you ask me. And the chip supports 6 different (albeit very similar) architectures. And it hit the market as the fastest chip available.
Quote:
Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch:
<strong>
Ranting, trollin' og facts?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Facts, i know somebody, how is nearly to Apple ... (not USA). These Apple guys told him, that a Apple workstation will arrive in summer 2003.
Previewsly, he found hints (PPC970) on Apples own HP, i don't know where but i think somewhere on the ADC pages?!
I hope i am wrong, i'm waiting for Power Macs G5 since 2002 (Thanx TheReg).
OK, you said your friend mentioned a workstation this year, but did he say 'no 970 desktop this year'? Also, could he be getting the 970 an the 'workstation' confused? How does he know that the 2 aren't to be released this year?
Sorry, just don't see why a workstation would be more important to Apple then desktops would.
Apple has been lowering prices, and part of their whole pitch to the UNIX community has been that you can get a UNIX workstation and a PC desktop combined for the price of a PC desktop. Given that the high-end workstation market is dying, there's no reason to enter it, especially if it means a radical shift in tactics.
I'm not saying the 970 will be cheap, but I'm expecting it to slot in right about where the PowerMacs are now, in the sense that if you spend as much money as you do on a complete PM rig, you get something comparable (only with far better performance).
New motherboards are coming and Apple has been able to desing these motherboards with the future in mind. No OS9 booting ...no old crusty MPX bus.
I will reserve judgment until the first sytems ship. I am however optimistic.
It's time to move forward. I expect Apple to infuse the Powermac line fully with 970's and if anything is "Workstation" priced it will be loaded to the gills.
I can't stop thinking about the length of these boards. I agree that it sounds like a Xserve 1U rack size board to me as well. I would certainly use a PowerMac in a 1, or 2U rack space if it had all the features of my standing desktop PowerMac model, but I fear that PCI-(X) space would be limited, and I would end up buying an Apple, or more likely a cheaper 3rd party Raid setup for added drive space. That would be totally unacceptable.
On the other hand if Apple is designing a new PowerMac enclosure for the 970 I hope they do not loose the drop down door. The convenience of the door alone is worth it's weight in gold, and everybody that ever expanded drive space, or memory, or just opened the thing is aware of it.
EDIT: And you know everybody is going to nag if it does not have
DDR 3500 - it's available to buy now, don't skimp on features.
USB 2.0 - I don't know why it's not an option yet?
PCI-X - available inb PC's now
FireWire 800 - not worried about that.
Serial ATA - Available in PC's now
And, dual processors for the high end models, not just low end.
Originally posted by Programmer
That's a good article -- in particular it highlights how long processor development takes. IBM started the POWER4 project in 1996, aiming for completion late-2001. And they did it! That's an astounding feat of engineering, if you ask me. And the chip supports 6 different (albeit very similar) architectures. And it hit the market as the fastest chip available.
Ageed. it's not like Apple can snap their finger and get a new processor when they want it. So, at least to me, bashing Apple for not getting a faster processor when Moto had problems is a moot point. They were probably aware of what IBM was doing and realized they had options and exercised them. Wonder how they got IBM to add Altivec (cash or contract for purchase. Probably never know?)
Originally posted by Bigc
Wonder how they got IBM to add Altivec (cash or contract for purchase. Probably never know?)
They probably just asked them. IBM had a some SIMD in the work's for this (rumors said so anyway), it was similar to altivec, but better. I'm hoping that's what it is, and we'll hear about it's improvements in a keynote.
Originally posted by Bigc
Wonder how they got IBM to add Altivec (cash or contract for purchase. Probably never know?)
cash no. probally contract.
don't know if it's enough to sign a contract for say 800,000 - 1 million units a year to get IBM to add altivec.
Originally posted by KidRed
OK, you said your friend mentioned a workstation this year, but did he say 'no 970 desktop this year'? Also, could he be getting the 970 an the 'workstation' confused? How does he know that the 2 aren't to be released this year?
Sorry, just don't see why a workstation would be more important to Apple then desktops would.
No he didn't, these are my thoughts only. But maybe i'm wrong. Isanely Great Mac talks about two different MOBOs (pro/ consumer)
http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=1838
One question:
The PPC 970 back side bus is 1/2 of processor speed, right?
If a 2.5GHz PPC970 is available, this means a 1.25GHz back side bus (625MHz FSB):eek:
What kind of memory can support it?
When will it available?? DDR2 625?
Originally posted by Fat Freddy
No he didn't, these are my thoughts only. But maybe i'm wrong. Isanely Great Mac talks about two different MOBOs (pro/ consumer)
http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=1838
One question:
The PPC 970 back side bus is 1/2 of processor speed, right?
If a 2.5GHz PPC970 is available, this means a 1.25GHz back side bus (625MHz FSB):eek:
What kind of memory can support it?
When will it available?? DDR2 625?
You don't need to have synchronously clocked memory to match the processor. This is handled by the memory controller, and you can use any kind of memory, even down to PC133
[Translated by Google]
- As for the prototypes, the processor should be established with 45° on the mother charts of series. One can explain that by the greatest complexity of wiring 64 bits.
- the processor will be directly established on the mother chart of the machines thus more charts girls. It will be on a socket resembling that of Pentium.
- the mother chart will have an integrated port fiber channel and will support the USB 2.0.
Didn't we see a diagonal ship layout before? Is this new? No wait, that was a diagonal layout on a daughtercard. Hm.
Fibre Channel or a fiber optic port? Either way very nice.
USB 2.0? Blah. USB -still- is for mice; Firewire is for men.
Oh and case manufacturers have until April 15th to offer bids for "future professional machines (not of P62 code)."
They're coming.
Screed
Originally posted by sCreeD
Macbidouille has added some rumors:
[Translated by Google]
Didn't we see a diagonal ship layout before? Is this new? No wait, that was a diagonal layout on a daughtercard. Hm.
Fibre Channel or a fiber optic port? Either way very nice.
USB 2.0? Blah. USB -still- is for mice; Firewire is for men.
Oh and case manufacturers have until April 15th to offer bids for "future professional machines (not of P62 code)."
They're coming.
Screed
I saw it on a picture, still knows someone the "P58" guy?
I have it already in my documents folder